Re: PPA Statement
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, IMO if a federal law giving poker this exemption is passed, then, under a line of cases referred to as the dormant commerce clause cases, that exemption would preempt state laws on online gambling.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly. I ask again, why would PPA then need to promote regulation of something that has just been made perfectly legal?
[/ QUOTE ]
It would not appeal to a libertarian but regulation can be used to help problem gamblers, ordinary players and help promote the game to a wider audience.
In Sept 2007 any UK based site will have to do quite a few "good" things because of the regulations. Ok things a site could choose to do anyway but under the regs they must...
Hold players money in a segregated account
Pay out promptly
Clearly and accurately show the odds (casino etc not poker really)
Ensure the games are fair and have them tested/audited
Make users set deposit limits per week/month
Show users what their total loss/win is
Show users how long they have been playing that session
Ensure all registered players are over 18
Allow players to self exclude
Link to gambling help sites/groups
Have a responsible gambling policy
Seek to identify and help problem gamblers
Pay towards gambling research and gambling welfare services
Be "fit and proper" people - no crims.
Monitor for and report potential money laundering activities.
After all this they get official sanction which makes the site more attractive to the casual player. (More Fish)
[/ QUOTE ]
So you are saying you can't have an exemption or carveout without also having regulations for that exemption? That doesn't seem to be the PPA (and others) stance.
|