Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Internet Law & StrategyKickerFeaturesTopicsTechnology Media and TelecomSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Internet Gambling Banned

By Sean F. Kane
October 30, 2006

The House and Senate worked late into the night on Friday, Sept. 29, 2006 to finalize 'H.R. 4954: Security and Accountability For Every Port Act' or the SAFE Port Act and get it to the House floor. By early in the morning on Saturday, Sept. 30, 2006, just before adjourning for the election break, the House had passed the bill by a count of 409-2, and the Senate had agreed to the conference report by unanimous consent. Senate Majority Leader, and Presidential hopeful Bill Frist (R-TN) was the point-person for certain groups lobbying to ban Internet gambling with the addition of Title VIII to the legislation.

Title VIII of H.R. 4954 is entitled 'Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006' (the Act). The bill prohibits banks and other financial institutions from processing payments for online-gambling companies. However, exempted from this legislative ban are state lotteries, fantasy sports leagues, horserace betting and Indian gaming. An earlier version of the bill ' passed by the House on July 10, 2006 ' approved an additional provision updating and expanding the 1961 Wire Act, which prohibits gambling companies from using wire-based communications to place bets, to specifically include use of the Internet. However, this provision was not ultimately included in the version finally passed by the full Congress. President Bush signed the bill into law on Friday, Oct. 13, 2006, a date that many offshore online-gambling entities are finding sufficiently unlucky as their potential U.S. market vanishes.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.