suzecat said:Hummmmmm, apparently AOL hasn't flipped the switch yet.
Two points:
First, banks/credit cards were blocked as a result of amended banking regulations. As an earlier poster mentioned, someone was able to squirm out of legitimate debt and it scared the hell out of 'em (banks).
Second, until (BIG UNTIL) such time as the Congress/Senate votes AND approves a bill making gambling illegal, ISPs are not going to ban gambling related sites. Sure, they might be investigating contingency plans as we debate these issues, but they are not going to implement anything until they are legally obligated to do so. That would be, at best, like shooting themselves in the foot.
Lest we forget the states that allow (even encourage) gambling in the US. In order for any gambling ban to take effect, years of rewriting the US Constitution would be in order. SO, relax.
And BeetleB, you ain't gettin' rid of us that easy -- so just get back to work
Good post, Suze - two other things to consider:
1) The activities of institutions of influence that seek to protect individual US freedoms are sure to be triggered by any attempt to tamper with ISPs, and that will gain substantial popular support. I think there may also be many politicians who would be reluctant to support this sort of ISP action - they must know it would not go down well with their constituents.
2) We have already seen, year after year the impact that vested interests can have on attempts to ban internet gambling (example: the horse racing fraternity who don't want to see Internet possibilities slip from their grasp although they have no problem with seeing online casino gambling curtailed)
I think this would not only impact the ban on Internet gaming per se, but also any part of the enforcement provisions that involve filtering gambling sites through the ISPs. The two are entwined, and I doubt that exemptions would be the answer - they haven't been in the past.