Proposed internet poker ban in MA

[Berge20]

Facts are a funny thing D$D, particularly in the political world [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
So, who's gotten the real answer from Mass? Does it or doesn't it outlaw internet gambling?

[/ QUOTE ]


CliffsNotes: I.G. is currently illegal in Mass.; and this is a prime time for PPA to change that and the bill.


The sad truth is this bill shows that internet gambling is already illegal in Mass, for sites and players. Here are a few reasons why.

Think about the new bill for a minute---it proposes to regulate/license 3 new casinos. If the bill is needed to have these new casinos, it follows that some existing Mass. laws would need to regulate existing internet gambling casinos doing business in Mass, so they can be legal. Sadly, there is no such law; presuming them to be currently legal is wrong. Does the new bill change penalties or make current crimes more explicit? Probably.

If a law existed now regulating internet gambling sites and players in Mass., wouldn't you programming geniuses have several sites open 24/7 running games, blackjack and slots? And be hiring marketing geniuses to push the legality/convenience/trustworthiness/cost of your Mass. online casinos? And be selling stock by the truckload to people like me that understand how lucrative this would be? Anyone see these activities? Nope, no such law.

The Mass. Attorney General reinforces illegality in an opinion that says poker tournaments are illegal for players and business. There is nothing in their anti-gambling general law that specifically says "poker tournaments" that I found, but the AG opinion came down anyway. One of the laws used in the opinion spells out --> person that bets on results of game = prison/fine. No exception was made for internet, Joe’s garage or Diane’s pool hall; only for charity with strict rules.

Some assume internet gambling sites somehow don’t need regs/license for Mass. legality. If sites don't need regs, then who does? Just resort casinos and the ponies? We are missing some real opportunities if it’s a free-for-all in Mass. You people that think a site is legal just because the law never specifically says it isn’t, need to convince Mass. (and other states) or know the penalties if you are wrong.

And please, when complaining about how this post is not positive, tell me where and how internet gambling is proven to be a legal activity in Mass. Unless that is shown, I think it would be an amazingly positive time for Mass. players and PPA to face reality and work with the Gov. to change the bill AND existing poker law.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Facts are a funny thing D$D, particularly in the political world [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a shame they often don't matter at all. Things would be so much eaiser.


D$D

[Skallagrim]

Permafrost may be right about current gambling laws in MA, but he may also be wrong. IMHO, he is probably wrong, despite the MA AG's opinion.

MA gambling law is particularly complex, and deals with premises where gambling takes place for more than the laws of any other state. This makes MA law particularly inapplicable to the internet. MA law does not say "gambling is illegal;" it says things like "whoever owns a tavern, inn or other place of public accomodation or entry and permits gambling to take place therein...." Nor does MA gambling law specifically cover poker (it almost always speaks only of lotteries and betting on events you dont participate in). Clearly, if poker is not a lottery (i.e., not a game of chance) then it is not gambling under MA law.

My legal opinions have not always prevailed in the courts, so dont take what I say as fact either. The correct understanding of the current situation is precisely that, there are no known facts with respect to online poker, only contrasting opinions.

One thing I CAN agree with Perma on though, getting a specific online-poker carve-out passed (by an amendment to this bill) would be an absolutely great achievement, and render the opinions discussed above irrelevant.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
And please, when complaining about how this post is not positive, tell me where and how internet gambling is proven to be a legal activity in Mass. Unless that is shown, I think it would be an amazingly positive time for Mass. players and PPA to face reality and work with the Gov. to change the bill AND existing poker law.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easy, go to www.worldwinner.com

They offer ALL kinds of Internet Wagering on Skill Gaming and are LOCATED in Newton, Mass.

They are accepting bets / wagers in state on card games, board games, puzzle games and others.

OK, now, the question should be poker, not gambling.
but, since my position (and many sites as well) is poker is a game of skill (more than mere chance), it too is legal.

Since they have never been arrested or prosecuted, it must be legal, for now.

However, under the new bill, these games of even skill will not be legal in Mass.

obg

[Dmunnee]

Randy et al,

I am good friends with the district director for congresswoman Niki Tsongas in Lowell. I know she is not part of state legislature, but the district director is very good friends with almost all of state senators/reps. I talked to him about everything today and he told me if I came up with a 1 page thing to say what the provision is, why it is bad, and what should be done instead, and he will present it to all the state senators and reps he knows. This includes Steven C. Panagiotakos, who apparently is most likely to be the next senate president.

I am not a good writer but if you guys can put together a really good one page summary then I can present it to the district director and do some real damage here in our favor.

[sobefuddled]

There is a very big differnce between WorldWinner and on-line poker. Here is how they get around it_taken from their site:
"Even with games in which chance would appear to dictate a role in the outcome of the contest, such as solitaire, WorldWinner has engineered the game so the outcome is based on the player's skill. For example, WorldWinner levels the playing field by providing each player with an equally difficult hand of cards, so it's ultimately how quickly and skillfully each player approaches the game that determines the winner. And while every WorldWinner solitaire hand is potentially solvable if a player plays their cards right, a player ultimately wins a tournament by outscoring their opponent, even if they don't solve the hand.

Although the distinctions between skill-based games and games of chance are clear, "
Obviously the task at hand in Massachusetts is to prove that poker is skill based rather than "chance" based.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Randy et al,

I am good friends with the district director for congresswoman Niki Tsongas in Lowell. I know she is not part of state legislature, but the district director is very good friends with almost all of state senators/reps. I talked to him about everything today and he told me if I came up with a 1 page thing to say what the provision is, why it is bad, and what should be done instead, and he will present it to all the state senators and reps he knows. This includes Steven C. Panagiotakos, who apparently is most likely to be the next senate president.

I am not a good writer but if you guys can put together a really good one page summary then I can present it to the district director and do some real damage here in our favor.

[/ QUOTE ]

TE, John, Randy, and Bryan,

Please jump all over this offer!


D$D

[oldbookguy]

You are missing the whole point, under this new Mass. law, EVEN these games will be illegal.

That was the point of the question, legal in Mass. and my reply, skill gaming is legal and of-course our / my position is poker is no LESS skill than solitaire, ergo, legal as well.

The fact that each player has an equally difficult hand, there is still chance involverd, you are faced with chooosing say, which 9 to move to the 10, one right, one wrong, pure chance.

Poker is much the same way, is it easy playing pocket KK when a ace flops? Or QQ wnen A K flops?

No.

obg


[ QUOTE ]
There is a very big differnce between WorldWinner and on-line poker. Here is how they get around it_taken from their site:
"Even with games in which chance would appear to dictate a role in the outcome of the contest, such as solitaire, WorldWinner has engineered the game so the outcome is based on the player's skill. For example, WorldWinner levels the playing field by providing each player with an equally difficult hand of cards, so it's ultimately how quickly and skillfully each player approaches the game that determines the winner. And while every WorldWinner solitaire hand is potentially solvable if a player plays their cards right, a player ultimately wins a tournament by outscoring their opponent, even if they don't solve the hand.

Although the distinctions between skill-based games and games of chance are clear, "
Obviously the task at hand in Massachusetts is to prove that poker is skill based rather than "chance" based.

[/ QUOTE ]

[sobefuddled]

Show me where in the legislation you find that OBG. The legislation is specific to "wagering." In poker we do wager on every hand. At world games you pay to play a game. Whoever wins the game wins the money the prize but you do not "wager" before every turn. There is no house rake either. I rhink you might make the case that a poker tournament is equivalent to what world games does but you would not be able to make the case for ring games. At least that is how I'm understanding the issue.