New US threat to online gambling

The list is sideways in my copy....is that the way it was put together? I'm not really familiar with Adobe..but I guess there's a way for me to rotate it...I'll figure it out.

If I were a Minnesota state resident, I'm pretty sure I'd be camped out, or handcuffed to a tree...on the property of the Government agency responsible for this. Or at my state legislature. I'd do anything I could to raise awareness of this to my fellow residents, including getting the media as involved as possible. When does this madness end?

I've been ranting for the last couple of days about people being too complacent.....and this just proves my point. People need to start making some serious noise about this shit.....big brother be damned. JMO anyway.
 
This is clearly as half-assed and uninformed as the Kentucky BS imo.

The trouble with government officials is that they can launch actions like this with impunity, and no need to consider the legal costs (that's the taxpayer's dollar they're using and abusing, so it's not a big financial consideration for them)

Yet, this sort of BS can cost legitimate businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars in making the legal moves necessary to short-circuit this sort of nonsense.:mad:

Maybe it's time someone sued one of these dickheads in his personal capacity, although in most cases officials like Willems will be covered by state indemnities, I'll bet.
 
I'm still trying to figure out just exactly what this means for people there. And, like another poster, is Minn. a state that specifically has a law against online gambling? And what does this mean for those who like to visit us here at Casinomeister?

I do wish someone with balls and money would take on all these stupid little pissant lawmakers that nibble away at our basic rights and open up a can of whupass in the court system. Take it to court, take it down to the finish.

There are SO many more important things for our governing officials to worry about other than whether Joe Schmoe is going to blow $25 at a freaking online casino. Yes, there are addicts and ne'erdowells gambling when they shouldn't. But then again, there are people in goverment postions pretending to have brains when they don't and spending taxpayers money on stupid crap like this. And I do believe this idiotic move will cost them... I can only hope that, while Justice may be blind, she's not totally dead.

Pardon the rant... I'm just so sick of all this stupid sh*t... :puke:

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Update

MINNESOTA LEGISLATOR CRITICAL OF ONLINE GAMBLING BAN (Update)

Garofalo tells state: Don't block online gambling without legislative approval

With public reaction growing against an attempt by Minnesota state enforcement officials to block Internet gambling sites at ISP level (see previous InfoPowa reports), a prominent member of the state legislature - and a Republican at that - came out in opposition to the ban this week.

The Minnesota Star Tribune reports that Representative Pat Garofalo, a Republican from Farmington, introduced legislation Monday that would bar the Department of Public Safety from forcing Internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to 200 online gambling Internet gaming sites that state enforcement officials have targeted at random. The legislation is in response to a letter sent last week from the state Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division to 11 ISPs directing them to block the sites. There is no indication yet that any of the ISPs intend to act on the state's request, and ISPs have declined comment.

Garofalo's legislation would halt the action by the state and make it conditional on legislative approval.

"The Department of Public Safety has to have better things to do with their time than to go after a college kid in his dorm room or some guy sitting in his basement spending a couple of hours playing online poker," Garofalo told the newspaper. "Demanding that a private-sector Internet service provider block access to websites is not a proper function of our state government."

The director of the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division, John Willems said he would have to hold off reacting to the bill until he has consulted with the commissioner's office for the Department of Public Safety.

Willems said: "We have not heard from the ISPs apart from Dish TV, which has told me that they work with a third-party company to provide Internet access to their customers who need it."

Garofalo remained critical of the enforcement official's activities: "I'm certainly not condoning online gambling," he said. "But I have serious concerns about government banning access to web sites. This is the kind of thing they do in communist China, not the United States of America.

"Besides, how about we focus on balancing the state's $6.4 billion budget deficit and not harassing Minnesotans anymore than Democrat legislative leaders are already trying to do?"

The banning attempt is attracting growing criticism, an example being the online publication Broadband which described the enforcement initiative as "unlikely to succeed" given that it is technically almost impossible and legally dubious.

"The state wants to force ISPs to adhere to inapplicable "common carrier" laws, despite the fact that modern ISPs have been classified as "information services" and deregulated," an editorial observed. It was followed by wide comment from readers generally critical of the state's banning attempt.

"This is as tedious and stupid as the country of Australia and the Mormons in Utah attempting to filter the Internet," wrote one contributor. "Maybe Minnesota needs to secede from the Union and form their own country with Utah and Texas? Then all the fundie religious fanatics and other nutjobs can all live together in one big, happy, filtered existence without being bothered by reality"

Another responded: "It's not "fundie religious fanatics" behind this - it's a state bureaucrat trying to protect legal Indian casinos and state lottery proceeds."

"Minnesota has got bigger freaking problems to worry about [than] gambling online, wrote another, listing what he saw as more immediate priorities. "Funny thing is nobody wants to back a bill to make gambling outside of Indian Casinos."

The enforcement officials did not escape criticism either - one correspondent wrote: "It was the (unelected) head of Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement that came up with this website blocking nonsense. Why can't the moron lawmakers realize that....you can not legislate morality!"
 
I tend to think that the misguided person who put this in motion is not thinking about morality or protection for the people in the true sense of genuine caring and concern. It comes down to the mighty dollar and how they can get more of it for themselves and wanting to stop the perceived revenue loss on their own legalized gambling (such as lottery tickets and scratch tickets).

It's a hair brained idea expecting the big ISP's to protect us from ourselves or what government decides that we need to be protected from. Can you imagine the expense that the ISP's will incur if they are required to put filters in place? And who will pay for this......consumers in the end. What about the smaller ISP's who can't afford another silly expenditure? Oh and if it passes then they will have to institute a fine/fee schedule for the ISP's that don't comply or who let one slip by them. Talk about huge headaches and big expenses! Again the costs passed on to consumers.

In my opinion if there is anything on the internet that should be filtered or taken off, it's the vile scrounge of child porn but they either can't do that or there isn't enough perceived money taken out of someone's pocket to take that seriously and actually do something about that or is it even possible that it could be filtered out? Doubt it!
Politicians must have their stupid priorities right!
 
Last edited:
I'm kinda torn about this.

As an owner of websites that promote online gambling, my sites and my bottom line would would benefit from a ban like this.

However as an American, the idea that peoples freedom is being taken away disgusts and angers me at a fundamental level.
 
I'm kinda torn about this.

As an owner of websites that promote online gambling, my sites and my bottom line would would benefit from a ban like this.

However as an American, the idea that peoples freedom is being taken away disgusts and angers me at a fundamental level.

Please explain Lots0, how would your sites and bottom line benefit??
 
Update

iMEGA TAKES THE INITIATIVE IN MINNESOTA ISSUE (Update)

No need to concede to the enforcement agency's demands, says civil rights group

The Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA) has been quick to follow up its condemnation of an attempt by Minnesota enforcement officials to censor the Internet through ISP blocks, writing to the Internet Service Providers concerned and advising them that they need not comply with the state's requests.

Minnesota's Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Division, headed by John Willems, created a furore earlier this week by asking ISPs to ban a list of over 200 randomly selected online gambling websites domiciled outside the USA (see previous InfoPowa reports).

iMEGAs letter highlighted the state agencys error applying a federal law the Wire Act of 1961 (18 USC 1084) as the basis for issuing an order to block Minnesota residents from freely accessing the websites, pointing out among other issues that the list included sites that did not accept business from US residents, and some that were no longer even in business.

Because website operators are not subscribers of yours, have no contracts with you and are not provided facilities by you, you should be aware that the MN DPS is attempting to mislead (either intentionally or inadvertently) you into believing that you are bound by federal law to do what the MN DPS asks, the letter stated.

In fact, [the Wire Act] simply does not apply to the web site operators and imposes no duty upon you and provides no authority to you to comply with the MN DPS request.

iMEGA sent the letter to the ISPs in hope of persuading them not to block access to the sites by Minnesota residents.

The DPS has issued this order on erroneous legal ground, said Joe Brennan Jr., iMEGA chairman. We hope that the ISPs will disregard the order, and that DPS will reconsider their actions and the far-reaching effects this kind of Internet censorship would have.

Interested readers can find the full content of the letter here:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Casino City has analysed the Minnesota black list to see how relevant it is to residents of that state, and they've come up with some numbers that vindicate comments made in the industry that the "random" selection was poorly done.

"Only 44 of the 200 Web sites that Minnesota's Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division want to block from its residents actually accept players from the state, according to an audit of the list that was completed by Casino City.

"That means just 22 percent of the sites AGED wants to block affect Minnesota residents."

That's what happens when you allow enforcement zealots to run wild.:eek:
 
Update

MINNESOTA BAN CHALLENGED IN COURT

iMEGA in the forefront of the fight again

The Interactive Media and Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA) has followed up on its condemnation of the attempt by Minnesota enforcement officials to ban 200 online gambling websites at ISP level by filing suit in the US District Court of Minneapolis (see documentation here
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
)

And it has declared its intention to recoup legal fees necessarily expended in challenging the action of non-elected state officials, invoking USC 1983 and firing a warning shot across the bows of other state officials who may be considering questionable 'enforcement' techniques that impact fundamental constitutional rights.

The iMEGA action requests that the court halt the Minnesota Department of Public Safety's Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement division from enforcing an order its director John Willems issued to 11 Internet service providers (ISPs), to block state residents' access to 200 Web sites (see previous InfoPowa reports).

"We filed this to first, get MN DPS to rescind their order to the ISPs, and second, to put any other state on notice that a similar action will be contested in court," said Joe Brennan Jnr., iMEGA's chairman.

The iMEGA suit names John Willems as director of AGED, and claims that Minnesota lacks the authority to compel ISPs to block residents access sites, and that the actions of the state and its servants constitute a violation of free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

"It's our hope that Minnesota will recognize their error and drop their blocking order," said Brennan. "Censoring Internet access for Minnesota residents would establish a troubling precedent of government intrusion into the online world, and we just can't allow that to happen."

iMEGA earlier communicated with the ISPs involved, advising them of their legal position and the fact that they were not compelled by law to comply with the AGED poorly researched demands to block specific websites. The advisory claimed that Minnesota had neither the authority nor the jurisdiction to order the ISPs to block Minnesota residents access to sites that were not located within the state.

According to iMEGA, the response from the ISPs has so far suggested that they are disinclined to accede to the AGED demand.

"In response to our letters (sent out) yesterday, they are not inclined to comply with the Minnesota order," commented Brennan.

In an interesting footnote to the iMEGA action, an independent study of the website blacklist which Willems wants ISPs to block was carried out by the Casino City gambling inormation website. Only 44 of the 200 Web sites that Minnesota's Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division seeks to censor actually accept players from the state. That means just 22 percent of the sites AGED wants to block affect Minnesota residents.

The study vindicated comments made earlier by the iMEGA chairman that questioned how much thought had been devoted by AGED staff into making the 'random' selection.
 
if they can shut them down that way then why can,t they do the same for internet porn? gezzz why don,t they all start treating us like 5 year olds and come into our homes to sit our computers on perntal contol so we can only go to the site our goverment wants us 2. someone is getting paid off by porn sites caz u never hear about all the sites that kids can log onto and the sites that have kids doing things a grown up would blush at. shows what is inportent to the goverment and i don,t say my goverment caz it is no longer for the people by the people.

thats what i was thinking. In my opinion Porn is 25 times more detrimental to society than online gambling ever could be.
 
<sigh> will it ever end?

All it takes is one politician to make a false statement (in this case that online gaming is illegal), and the media and nearly everyone else sucks up to it.
Bryan you write good songs and you don't even know it :) The fact is that we are so time consumed by regular jobs and burned out from stress that it really consumes the rest of the brain power we should have.

The general public usually has no time to dig up facts and politicians know it,they figure the small number of people that really see through their act will not outweigh the hyptonized percentage of the population :(

By the time we figure it out,the politicians already played out their roles and then they draw off our attention by making more bogus claims so we forget the old stuff.

Sadly the general population will never listen to people like me and you Bryan :( they are far too busy earning and spending money.

Does anyone even know why there is still a war being waged by the USA ???First the weapons of mass destruction and bin laden now what?

In my opinion its all about oil money and power...
 
Well, the Minnesota enforcement demand deadline has now passed and apparently not a single ISP has bothered to respond to it.

And iMEGA says it has had discussions with the state AG who is not going to push the issue.

It will be interesting to see where John Willems, the Minnesota director of enforcement who started this appallingly badly researched initiative, goes from here.
 
Last edited:
Minnesota drops action to make ISPs block gambling sites

Looks like this battle is over.
The following is taken from egrmagazine.com:


Minnesota drops action to make ISPs block gambling sites


The US state of Minnesota has dropped action to force internet service providers (ISPs) including AT&T, Comcast and Verizon to block state residents access to a 'blacklist of 200 gambling websites.

As reported on EGRmagazine.com, the action by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS) faced opposition from bodies including Americas Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) lobby group, which wrote to the 11 ISPs last month telling them to ignore the order, as well asking the District Court in Minneapolis, Minnesotas biggest city, to prevent the DPS from enforcing the order (more).

Representative Pat Garafolo, who submitted the original bill seeking to block state residents access, issued the announcement, which he said occurred after the legal position was reconsidered.

Garafolo said in a statement: This is a great day for internet freedom. In the spirit of cooperation and in recognition of the rescission of these notices, I am more than happy to withdraw my bill and in its place sponsor a discussion aimed at establishing a framework for regulating and licensing the online gaming industry.

The bill was also opposed by Americas Poker Players Alliance (PPA). PPA Minnseota State Director Matthew Werden said: Minnesota poker players made our voices heard, the state listened and ended its ill-advised and improper attempt to circumvent the rights of Minnesota poker players.

In other US egaming regulation news, the state of Illinois is close to passing a bill to legalise online horse betting (more), while California is debating a bill to legalise intra-state poker (more).

At federal level, a bill to overturn the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act was submitted by Representative Barney Frank last month (more).
 
It's a little confusing at present - the PPA is claiming as above, but iMEGA (which played a major role in attacking this badly thought through enforcement initiative) is saying it is still active.

Perhaps more clarity will emerge in the next few days, as Rep. Garafalo seems pretty confident that we've seen the back of this ridiculous attempt by officialdom to censor the Internet. And in his position, he probably knows better than anyone else.
 
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

By BRIAN BAKST, Associated Press Writer - Mon Jun 8, 2009 2:05PM EDT

ST. PAUL, Minn. - Minnesota regulators may have been outplayed when they bet a decades-old federal law would lend itself to an online gambling crackdown.

Following a lawsuit by the gambling industry, which considers the push a violation of federal commerce and free-speech protections, state officials said Monday they'll withdraw a demand that Internet service providers block access to hundreds of sites.

In exchange for the state backing off, the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association filed court papers Monday ending its court fight.

The chairman of the online gambling trade group didn't ...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top