What actual regulation do you want to see for online poker?

PokrLikeItsProse · #1 03-28-2007, 04:54 AM

Whatever happens, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that we just return to the status quo before the UIGEA. Given the option, I would prefer that online poker be regulated and taxed.

Here's a hypothetical. Assume that online poker is made explicitly legal and a U.S. national gaming commission is set up to oversee things. What would regulations would you want to see?

In the past, I've floated the idea of, at a minimum, poker rooms reporting whoever makes at least $600 in a year to the IRS. That seems fair.

Here are some other things I would like to see:
-Independent testing of software and random number generators. Not that I believe that online poker is rigged, but it's just better to have an independent government authority saying that it isn't
-A registry of known cheaters to be shared with all online poker rooms. If you commit credit card fraud to fund your bankroll or play multiple accounts in the same tournament at one online site, the other sites should be able to ban you immediately.
-Full disclosure of site ownership to prevent charges of conflicts of interest.

That's just some of the regulations I would like to see in online poker, but it's enough to get a potential discussion started. In the event that the U.S. government makes online poker explicitly legal, who do you want writing the regulations, the poker rooms or the players?

Emperor · #2 03-28-2007, 05:33 AM

I would prefer regulated, but not taxed.

Regulations I would like to see: None.

Bringing it onshore would allow me to sue for any losses incurred due to any tort type transgressions. Which is where a lot of current customer complaints could be resolved.

Let the competitive market weed out the sites that suck and the ones that don't.

Bringing it onshore would allow pokersites to pursue credit card fraud in the country as well.

WhoIam · #3 03-28-2007, 06:08 AM

I'd personally like to see US sites open only to US players. Make any kind of cheating a federal crime and prosecute anyone who can be proven to have engaged in botting or collusion. Have the sites send you an itemized tax form every year detailing your winning/losing sessions and net win or loss. Enact strict regulations to ensure that games are fair for the benefit of the fish.

demon102 · #4 03-28-2007, 06:22 AM

I'd personally like to see US sites open only to US players.

this seems like it would go against the law that deals with monopolies, dont know if it deals with international laws since it was made in the late 1800s but Id rather have a large variety of sites from all over the globe than just a few from within the US

playah8er · #5 03-28-2007, 08:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd personally like to see US sites open only to US players. Make any kind of cheating a federal crime and prosecute anyone who can be proven to have engaged in botting or collusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd hate to see only US sites, I enjoy talking to people from other countries alot when I'm playing and I'd hate to lose that. As far as making botting and colluding a federal crime is ridiculous. Botting in no way really impacts the game imo and colluding while its disgusting and terrible and shouldnt be tolerated, when it all boils down all it is is cheating at a game. You shouldnt be prosecuted for cheating at a game. Kicked off and banned from a site yes, but having your freedom taken away, no.

questions · #6 03-28-2007, 11:39 AM

Couple things:

1) Reliable age verification.

2) Verification of fairness of random number generators.

Also, I don't know how you would do this in practice, but I'd like to see deposit limits. That is, you can deposit only up to a certain amount per week/month whatever.

Regulation sucks, but it's necessary sometimes, and it helps bring things under control.

Taxes should be 1099 independent contractor sort of thing.

Emperor · #7 03-28-2007, 01:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]

1) Reliable age verification.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely

[ QUOTE ]

2) Verification of fairness of random number generators.

[/ QUOTE ]

This could be a neverending debate on what is "fair", what is "random", etc. I don't like it one bit. If NASA's mainframe can't crack Party's RNG then that is random enough for me. I hate even inferring to the fish that non-random is even in the realm of possibility.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I don't know how you would do this in practice, but I'd like to see deposit limits. That is, you can deposit only up to a certain amount per week/month whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like this at all. What if Bill Gates wants to play some $1m/$2m NLHE?

[ QUOTE ]

Regulation sucks, but it's necessary sometimes, and it helps bring things under control.

Taxes should be 1099 independent contractor sort of thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

OR better yet keep the regulations to ZERO or NONE, and make winnings TAX EXEMPT!

Petomane · #8 03-28-2007, 01:49 PM

Why regulate online poker and who is to regulate it? It's done a fine job regulating itself. Is E-bay supposed to be regulated too? And the entire Internet?

Online poker is not the government's business - it's not their jurisdiction. When sites like Party go public in London, they're being regulated over there.

Regulation is another word for monopoly.

When I play online poker or tic-tac-toe or buy stuff on E-Bay or order strippers, I do so AT MY OWN RISK. Do I need my life regulated?

The American government has not accepted that technology has advanced and changed our lives. The game of poker (and many other things) have been transformed for the better. If poker players all over the world can find a game at any time of night or day, well, that's progress. And it's not the government's job to stop this progress.

Why is online poker even an issue in congress?

DavidNB · #9 03-28-2007, 04:16 PM

I would like to see...

1: Certain types of software banned

2: Set limits on mutlitabling

3: Give online poker rooms legal recourse to purse credit card fraud and players with multi accounts on the same site.

4: Ensure companies are keeping players money accounts seperate from their expensives

PokrLikeItsProse · #10 03-28-2007, 06:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why regulate online poker and who is to regulate it? It's done a fine job regulating itself. Is E-bay supposed to be regulated too? And the entire Internet?

Online poker is not the government's business - it's not their jurisdiction. When sites like Party go public in London, they're being regulated over there.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think eBay exists in some sort of legal vacuum, you're wrong. Do you want a clear legal course of action in case of a dispute between you and an online poker room, or do you want the current status quo? If I were an American who thought that Party had negligently allowed someone else who is U.S.-based to commit a case of identity theft against me, does that mean I need to go to London to sue them?

If I were playing in a brick and mortar casino, I most certainly would prefer playing in one which is subject to the rules and regulations of a gaming commission rather than one which is subject to no authority. Why would I feel differently about gambling online?