PokerStars, the second largest online poker company, should put on a clinic in the art of statutory interpretation. They're currently doing quite the interpretive two-step in response to some anti-gambling legislation that Congress unexpectedly passed last month as a rider to a pretty uncontroversial port safety bill. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act purports to ban basically all online gambling, something it defines as "a sporting event or a game subject to chance." So what is an online gaming company to do? Well, PokerStars just announced that its lawyers have determined that the Act doesn't apply to it. How might it make such a claim that you ask? Simple... because Poker is not a game of "chance," but of "skill."
Friday, October 13, 2006
Game On
PokerStars, the second largest online poker company, should put on a clinic in the art of statutory interpretation. They're currently doing quite the interpretive two-step in response to some anti-gambling legislation that Congress unexpectedly passed last month as a rider to a pretty uncontroversial port safety bill. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act purports to ban basically all online gambling, something it defines as "a sporting event or a game subject to chance." So what is an online gaming company to do? Well, PokerStars just announced that its lawyers have determined that the Act doesn't apply to it. How might it make such a claim that you ask? Simple... because Poker is not a game of "chance," but of "skill."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
"a sporting event or a game subject to chance." --- well there goes online dating :).
I think there are a lot of attorney's who will rip that statutory language to shreds. Additionally, there is a lot of "proof" that poker is no less a game of chance than the stock market. I would love to hear the oral arguments over this one. The main problem is statutory intent is pretty unambiguous...
Legislative intent?! Oh BA... Justice Scalia would be so disappointed in you.
unambiguous indeed!
I didn't mean to let my favorite Justice down. How can I redeem myself? I'll just write a really strict abortion law or maybe lobby to outlaw gay hand holding, that should put me back his good graces.
Just as long as you're not handing out any "special rights" now, you hear?
Well, I suck at poker and I don't think it's because I'm unlucky. Definitely poor choice of words in defining gambling.
In any case it still qualifies under a "sporting event." Only true sporting events get aired on ESPN; i.e. Nascar, Texas Hold'em, dominoes, and spelling bees.
so does this mean that my high-stakes online Chutes and Ladders gaming site is going to be disbanded?
David - We need you drafting legislation on Capitol Hill kiddo.
Melbo - You forgot to mention Scrabble.
Smoothep - Depends on how
"smooth" your statutory interpretation skills are.
Anyone who has played Texas Holdem knows that there is a certain level of skill involved, to quote a famous movie line, "There is a reason the same people end up at the final table in the Wolrd Poker Tour every year".
I think it's tough to make concrete definitions, gambling vs. the stock market, skill vs. luck. etc.
I'd BET a million dollars that if the Us Greeedverment could find a way to tax these offshore companies, this law would have never passed.
TFB, that famous line is not true. The same people don't end up in the finals of the WSOP. I still think a lot of skill is involved, but it is still a game of chance.
Post a Comment