- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
KNOW YOUR ENEMY
Prime Table Games active in run-up to Congressional hearings on Internet gamblingTimed to precede Wednesday’s Congressional hearings on Internet gambling and the implications of the problematical Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), a land casino supplier has come out strongly against the online industry in an expensive, full page statement in the global edition of the respected Wall Street Journal.
Derek Webb, founder of Las Vegas-based Prime Table Games which placed the advert has featured in previous in anti-online gambling attacks.
Headlined “Who Will Face the Issues,” the WSJ statement outlines the perceived regulatory problems associated with international Internet gaming, citing gaming fraud, consumer protection and protection of intellectual property rights as major concerns.
“It is well known that there are off-shore based Internet gaming operators who are engaged in deceptive practices with American consumers and international players, and there is no adequate system in place to ensure full and appropriate regulation. Congress needs to take action soon, or these practices will only get worse,” the statement asserts.
Prime Table Games urges Congress to adopt specific regulatory strategies for online gambling consumer protection, including:
Limitations on solicitations and incentives to gamble, such as bonuses and cash back
Prohibition of affiliate relationships
Standard player verification procedures
Giving players the ability to self-exclude and have it automatically apply to all online gambling sites
Site operators assume responsibility for identity verification
Internet gambling sites be required to verify that players can afford to gamble at their chosen level.
Internet gambling debts shouldn’t be legally recoverable, and players who don’t pay gambling debts should automatically be placed on an exclusion list.“Internet gaming, by its very nature, has great potential for abuse,” Webb said in a supporting press release. “Site operators also should pay fees towards problem gambling treatment and research.”
On Wednesday, the House Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology will meet to discuss the proposed and much criticised UIGEA regulations.
Prohibition of affiliate relationships
they talking about us? ifso that’s freakin’ total bs! I must be mistaken.
i think they are talking about us prmoting them..
@Professor 158527 wrote:
KNOW YOUR ENEMY
“It is well known that there are off-shore based Internet gaming operators who are engaged in deceptive practices with American consumers and international players, and there is no adequate system in place to ensure full and appropriate regulation. Congress needs to take action soon, or these practices will only get worse,” the statement asserts.
Kind of reminds me back in 2003 when a neighboring state operated casino was “zeroing out bonus credits” at end of business each night until I blew the whistle on them by creating a site against them. Their lawyer had it shut down but I threw it back up. In his letter to me he said and I quote “zeroing out bonus credits at the close of business was a lottery decision”. Shortly after that they ceased the practice.
this is like a BIG WTF?!
1. Limitations on solicitations and incentives to gamble, such as bonuses and cash back
– why would you want to do that? is it because it competes with land based casino strategies of enticing players with free alcohol and accomodation? riight…2. Prohibition of affiliate relationships
– double WTF. welcome to ze internets!3. Standard player verification procedures
– i believe these are already in place. if UIGEA was not passed, than a lot more sites who accept US players would’ve been using professional verification procedures rather then now.4. Giving players the ability to self-exclude and have it automatically apply to all online gambling sites
– you can self exclude yourself from an online casino. but due to the nature of ze internets, i doubt you can exclude yourself from the whole industry (name one) online.5. Site operators assume responsibility for identity verification
– like they don’t now…6. Internet gambling sites be required to verify that players can afford to gamble at their chosen level.
– muahaha. i never saw a casino trying to verify that i can afford to gamble at any level. wtf is he on about? isn’t that invasion of privacy for a casino to have access to my financial statements to be able to tell whether i can “afford” to gamble or not? very hypocritical comment…7. Internet gambling debts shouldn’t be legally recoverable, and players who don’t pay gambling debts should automatically be placed on an exclusion list.
– not sure about this one.in summary i would like to say 2 things:
A. UK doesn’t seem to have any of these issues. Why does this guy have? Would you say that gambling in UK is not taken as seriously as it is in US or what? Is it something that this guy knows that nobody else does?
B. This issue seems to parallel (a very tiny bit) with the crisis the music industry is facing. Their lack of commitment to adapt to a new business environment is costing them, but instead of changing their business models, they are trying to prosecute individual downloaders…on the other hand, there hasn’t been a link found between an increase in online gambling and decrease of physical gambling, so i don’t understand what is this guy’s agenda!…recently i’ve read that in order for a law to exist, it must be enforceable. neither is UIGEA nor RIAA’s copyright cases are enforceable unless parties start suing millions of people individually. that’s just not right, no matter what any corporation or government says. so that’s that…
