secondlife casino owners: you could get charged for rackeetering

All dj's in Sl could face hefty fines

this is from shoutcast legal page..
Complying with copyright laws


Musical compositions and sound recordings are creative works that are protected by the copyright laws of the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) and other countries. Under U.S. law, the owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to (and to authorize others to) reproduce the work, use parts of the work in a new creation, distribute the work in whole or in part, and to publicly display or perform the work (including on web pages and through webcasting). With few exceptions, it is illegal to reproduce, distribute or broadcast a sound recording without the permission of the copyright owner. It is your responsibility to comply with the copyright laws when you become a webcaster.
There have been recent amendments to the copyright law regarding webcasting of sound recordings. These new provisions allow webcasting under the terms of a statutory license, as a way to help webcasters get permission without having to go to each sound recording's owner. The statutory license, however, has strict requirements that you must follow. Some of these requirements include the payment of license fees, limitations on the number of songs from the same album or artist that may be played in a three hour period (called the sound recording performance complement); a prohibition on publishing advance playlists; and a requirement to identify the song, artist and album on the website. There are other requirements as well. The Recording Industry Association of America provides quite a bit of information on copyright law as it applies to webcasting, and both ASCAP and BMI have created license agreements that they are willing to grant to webcasters that they believe conform to the provisions of the new copyright rules for webcasting. For additional information on the statutory license and other aspects of webcasting, please visit the following sites:


The U.S. Copyright Office
The Recording Industry Association of America - particularly http://www.riaa.com/issues/music/webcasting.asp
ASCAP - particularly http://www.ascap.com/weblicense/webintro.html
BMI - particularly http://www.bmi.com/iama/webcaster/index.asp
If you are uncertain about what you can and cannot do, we suggest you check with the copyright owner or the owner's representatives (such as through the organizations above), or consult a lawyer.

all dj's at clubs, casinos or any other place of buisness in sl is subject to these laws. by that i mean if you are selling anything in the esablisment in which the music is being played in. you had better have your liscening rights from ascap, bmi, and other recording industry entities. if not the fines are heavy.

here is the link...read up this is no less a joke then the gambling deal...actually its far worse. just takes a phone call.

http://www.shoutcast.com/download/broadcast.phtml#copyright

wow could it be the whole entertainment establishment is headed fo a crash???

glta
rog

1. Why do we need an ASCAP license?

Because the United States Copyright Law grants the owner of a copyrighted musical work — in our case, ASCAP's individual members — the exclusive right to perform it publicly. This means that such performances require the copyright owner's permission, and an ASCAP license can provide that permission. To perform a work "publicly" means, among other things, to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance of the work to the public. This includes Internet transmissions of music. Just as you pay for use of other forms of property, you must also pay for the use of musical property owned by the nearly 200,000 songwriter, composer and publisher members of ASCAP. Our members, many of whom are small business people, have authorized us to collect Internet license fees on their behalf. (We also represent and collect for affiliated foreign performing rights societies). After all, the presence of music adds value to an Internet site or service -- for example, by increasing the number and length of user visits. It only makes sense for the owner of the music copyright to be compensated fairly for the value that music brings to an Internet site or service

http://www.ascap.com/weblicense/webfaq.html

this is no joke and i would be far more worried if i was a dj then i would be as a casino owner in sl....music could be a thing of the past soon here, unless people can afford the hefty liscense fee required to play 99% of the music i hear in sl. even the cheapest liscence is far more then i would expect anyone to pay just to stream in sl....

No, I don't believe so. In such states, it is illegal to operate a lottery or sell lottery tickets. I do not believe it is illegal to have a lottery ticket from another state in your possession. Could be wrong, but that's my understanding.

Just like during prohibition: It was against the law to make, transport or sell booze, but drinking it was not outlawed.

i live in nc, and it was illegal to have on your possesion a lottery ticket. gambling is illegal here. or was the lottery started last month....but it is like the wire law, its interstate gambling. it was never enforced but on the books none the less. if i use a phone to place the bet or cross the states line physicaly to place the bet. 6 in one hand a half dozen in the other its still against the law.

Tempest in a teapot accurately describes my opinions of your abilities to use Google to find links to articles and to post out-of-context quotations to support your dire predictions and overly dramatic presentation of your "evidence." I never claimed it was a law of logic, those are your words.

My premise: Anna Bobbysocks is behaving like a drama queen and stomping her feet because not everyone here seems to agree with her that the federal authorites are going to begin arresting SL casino owners in the near future.

My supporting evidence: Nearly every post Anna Bobbysocks has made in reply to someone who looks at her "evidence" and does not come to share in her Chicken Little theory.

I provide no evidence because ultimately I could give a rats ass if every casino in SL shuts it's doors tomorrow. If I cared about this rather pointless debate half as much as you do, Anna, then perhaps I would be motivated to dredge up some links from Google in some time wasting attempt to refute someone whose not inclined to believe anyone who voices an opinion contrary to her own.

Good day, Anna, and again, please do enjoy your tea.

There is nothing out of context about my quotation.

The DOJ has clearly said they feel internet gambling is illegal. Do they have to personally come to your house and draw you a picture?

While I agree, SL may fly under the radar, I could see someone who has a grudge against Linden Lab for being permanently banned making it her personal mission to make sure that DOJ knows what's going on here.

As for the tempest in a teapot, I am afraid that is your own personal insecurities and those of others.

I have certainly never said this is the end of the world. In fact, it might be the start of a new one, where there is less gambling in SL.

One of the big problems with SL as a platform (and not just for games) is that it attracts serious people with serious money who get seriously angry if they are wronged.

internet streaming of music for profit is also illegal.....why dont you touch on that for us...how many sl dj's do you think have an ascap, bmi or american recording artist liscense...i venture to say not many, cus if they did ..they would surely know the law...and i wouldnt hear the same 50 cent song 3 times in 2 hours on the same station...

as far as the banned sl citizen with a grudge, if they havent exploited the possible illegal streaming of music here, i doubt they will us the casino angle. would be much easier to win the streaming issue then the casino issue ....hands down! jmo

rog

Yeah and I bet you think mcdonalds is a good place to eat because everyone else eats there.

that's a civil issue and you can't be indicted for it. there's a difference between going to jail and getting sued by the riaa

After looking at all the news on the internet gaming scandal that seems to be going on..im noticing that some of these are PUBLIC companies TRADING on AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGES....where the hell was the DOJ when these people were getting their companies listed....its not an easy feat. the sec is very stringent in what must be in compliance to be listed on a major exchange...from nature of the buisness all the way to the companies reporting of earnigs and taxes....i see two companies mentioned are nasdaq stocks....how the hell could they get listed if the buisness was an illegal activity. A little late the DOJ is. let a compnay get listed so american investors and traders around the world could get screwed in this scandal...unbelievable. these stocks are down 25% since the news broke....I think when the smoke clears the only charges will be of a tax and or book keeping issue. we will all find out as the story unfolds...as for sl casinos...i doubt any will be closing anytime soon.

rog

"We view internet gambling to be in violation of federal laws. "

Thank you Mr DOJ Spokesperson, please quote me the specific federal laws that makes you 'view' internet gambling to be a crime.

I hear the DOJ make lots of comments. None are to the effect of:

"Internet gamling in any form is a crime, and against USC Title XX Sections XXX & XXXX"

Nope, their comments are to the effect of:

"It is our assertion that internet gambling is a crime." -- True, accepting bets on sporting events is against the Interstate Wire Act of 1961.

"We believe internet gambling to be against current federal laws." -- You mean accepting bets on sporting events is against the Interstate Wire Act of 1961 right?

They seem to share their beliefs & assertions much more than they seem to share the actual letter of the law. If the law backed up their assertions & beliefs you can bet they would quote the statutes to you. -- When they omit such facts it is generally because the law does not back up their position and they would rather resort to overly-generalized statements that are only half-true in order to scare the rest into compliance of a non-existant law.

Some internet gambling is a crime, some forms of internet gambling violates Federal laws. -- True Statement.

All internet gambling is a crime, all internet gambling violates federal law. -- Untrue statement.

Read more about the Interstate Wire Act of 1961 here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Wire_Act

"The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Wire Act applies only to sports betting and not other types of online gambling. The Supreme Court has not officially ruled on the meaning of the Federal Wire Act as it pertains to online gambling."

"The law has been interpreted by some, including the Department of Justice, to mean that all online gambling is illegal. However, U.S. Courts have ruled to the contrary."

Can anyone on this forum quote for me another federal law that they believe would make running an online casino a crime? Other than the Interstate Wire Act which the courts have ruled apply only to sports betting?

Humm, the guy who got arrested.. What was the name of his website?... Betonsports.Com? Humm...

Some state laws may apply. For instance, it is now a Felony to play poker online in the state of Washington.

However I get lots of snail-mail from online poker sites that is post-marked Atlanta, Georgia. (Absolute poker for one).


---

Intresting article about legality of gambling in online games:
http://webpages.acs.ttu.edu/mmetheni/Internet%20Gambling%20and%20the%20MMORPG.htm

Internet gambling is illegal? Your all in trouble! =)

"The reality of the situation is that all of these activities in-game are the same thing. At its core, the MMORPG is just one large, complex game of skill, with some sub-games of chance. This would be a bold step in classification, but an essential one. Under this theory, all profits from playing an MMORPG are, in fact, gambling winnings for the player."

---


Im not an attorney, but I havent even ever seen a Federal Law which would prohibit me from setting up my own poker site based in the USA. Of course just to be on the safe side I would host and licence it through the Kankakee Indian Reservation in Canada like so many others. To the best of my knowledge many online poker sites do this very thing and have no problems.


So, now that we have established that the Interstate Wire Act of 1961 does not apply to anything other than sports betting what Federal Law would make you be concerned about the legality of casinos in Second Life? Please quote the tile & section in the United States Code.



Why all the confusion:

"Despite the divergent views . . ., the official position as expressed by the Justice Department [during the Clinton Administration] and several state attorneys general is to treat the Wire Act as applying broadly and covering all forms of Internet gaming."

I think alot of folks confuse the "official position of the DOJ" as being the actual law of the land as passed by congress.. The DOJ and several state attorneys cannot 'wish' a law into existance, only congress can..

The official position of the DOJ and the actual law as passed by congress conflict. And the judges seem to agree with congress in every case in which sports betting is not involved. Two against one, I'll side with Congress & the Courts..

18 USC 1955 - Prohibition of illegal gambling businesses - This law and others like it refer to 'illegal' gambling businesses, but this law doesn't make a gambling business illegal, another law must do so. It only spells out the punishment for running an 'illegal gambling business', it does not define one.


----

I would be intrested in learing more about individual state laws reguarding this issue. From what I see though, reguarding federal laws, I see little that would prohibit running a casino in Second Life.

You certianly have to pay taxes on any income you make, but that is an entirely seperate issue. You would still owe taxes if running a casino were legal or not.

An intresting discussion on a tax-related website I saw discussed was if Al Capone filed a tax return he would have been okay. He could have even claimed as deductions bribes, ammunition, costs incured in transporting illegal alcohol, kickbacks, money paid to 'enforcers'. I would love to see such a tax return, but thats a diffrent issue..

And you have presented, to the best of my knowledge, precisely zero evidence that the FBI has ever shown any interest in pursuing people gambling with game money in any MMOG, regardless of how easy it is to convert game money to real money and back (and it is, for most any MMOG). So, so far, evidence-wise, the score is still zero to zero.

Again, wake me up when someone finds some evidence that the FBI is investigating gambling in SL, World of Warcraft, Everquest, whatever. So far, indications are not very strong that they're interested in doing so. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, indications are non-existent. Zip indeed...

oh believe me you will go to jail if you cant afford the hefty fine you are going to get...this is not downloading mp3 files to burn music with...this is entertainment for profit by illegal means with copyrighted material and can be much much more the a civil issue. do some dd....

this line of thought bothers me.

you buy lindens with real money , gamble with it in a casino , then may be if you have any left convert it back in to real money.

is that not how a real casino works ?
you buy chips with real money , gamble with the chips , then convert the chips back at the end of the day.

as chip are not a recognised currency as such are you saying that it was not really gambling at all?

Thank you for yet another smartaleck "draw you a picture" comment so as to imply those who don't agree with you are so bloody dense that they need a white board and dry erase markers in order to grasp your plainly correct opinion. If you want to present your case, can you not do it without insulting those who disagree with you? The primary reason I am posting in this thread is because you're behaving poorly toward those who do not share your personal opinions and you're trying to create a HUGE scare amongst SL casino owners and patrons. For what reason? Personal enjoyment? Hell if I know...

I already stated earlier that I agree in part with your contention that SL casino owners may be at risk, but I disagree with the dire tone of your predictions primarily because there are a great many larger fish to fry than the relatively few gambling establishment owners in this somewhat small internet roleplaying game. I know you know how to use Google so try looking for online gambling sites. I know from your comment above that you realize that SL casinos may fly under the radar so please tell me WHY you're making such a freaking big deal out of this? Apparently you've come to the same conclusion as so many others here, myself included, that the risk is rather small to SL casino owners given the plethora of gigantic gambling sites that appeal to far more gamblers than in SL, so please help me understand the intensity of your emotion with regard to this topic. Do you have some personal stake in the outcome? Are you just trying to save the world one casino owner at a time? Help me understand...

The profits are very real when the accumulated L$ is cashed out.... just like in a real casino. Whoops...

Meh, online casinos and the ones in SL will prolly just end up regulated the same way RL ones are.

Toche, Anna! Is this more of your constructive debate and evidence or yet another little personal attack?

better pay your taxes if you made a profit...

Going to prison is actually pretty dramatic. If there's any threat at all of it -- and I think it's safe to say that there is at least the possibility at this point -- it's probably not something to treat casually. They flatly stated that they're not going to warn their targets before they hit them, so the first clue you're going to get, as an SL casino owner, if they decide to hit SL casino owners ... is federal agents at your door.

Call me Chicken Little if you like, but I'd call that dramatic. There's something to be said for the argument that listening to every dire prediction is a mistake, but there's also something to be said for the argument that ignoring a dire prediction that later turns out to be true might carry far greater consequences. You like to reference Chicken Little; well, have you ever heard the story of Cassandra?

We're learning that lesson about global warming right about now.



Simply: be the bigger person. And don't throw the baby out with the bathwater -- don't just ignore her point because you dislike her presentation of it.



What I said was, "And do you really think that if they wanted to, they couldn't? If you do, then all I can advise you to do is wake up." I didn't say, "They definitely will hit SL casino owners. Wake up!" I just pointed out that if the government decided to go after SL casino owners, it sure as hell could. And yes, if you think otherwise, you do need to wake up, and if you find that inflammatory? Tough. Get a thicker skin, and welcome to the real world. It's not all fun and games out there.

Mebbe one way to regulate on-line gambling would be for the betting houses to comply with the laws pertaining to the national and/or regional laws wherever each client lives. So that someone logging into, for instance William Hill, from Uzbekistan would be dealt with according to the laws of Uzbekistan and someone from Canada would be dealt with according to the Canadian laws as well as abiding by the laws of whatever country the betting shop is based in. Clunky and cumbersome, but more likely to happen than one overarching legislation for the entire internet. At least for the time being.

Thank you, Julia! You said what I've been feeling and was apparently unable to put into words!

This entire thread is rediculous. I don't see how any SL casino owner could be charged with racketeering or anything else for that matter. This is because the two transactions (gambling of software licenses, and trading of software licenses for cash on a secondary market (SECONDARY MARKET is very important here) are two DISTINCT transactions. L$ doesn't represent money, and it doesn't represent casino chips that a casino owner provided his/her customers with in exchange for money either.

L$ represents SOFTWARE LICENSES, just like any other content in SL. These licenses are NOT redeemable for cash by Linden Lab (although this probably wouldn't matter) OR by the casino owner. How a customer acquires the software licenses that he/she brings to a casino, or in what way he/she chooses to convey the right to use any licenses that he/she may win, to a THIRD PARTY, isn't really relevant. It's all just fun and games, utilizing content.

Frankly I am much more amused by the fact that people trust online casino websites that are not being watched and handled by local law agenceies to confirm that they are upholding to proper business practices.

And this especialy includes SecondLife - where any 2-weeks old newbie can knock up a fully functional "casino" with "custom betting machines" in afew hours.

Your point is very well taken, Alex. However, given that there are so many bigger fish to fry out there I stand by my contention that Anna is making a MUCH larger deal of this than is warranted. You are absolutley entitled to feel that the urgency of Anna's warning is warranted and I respect your opinion and your right to hold it. All I am asking of Anna is that she show that same respect to others who, after reading her evidence, cannot in good conscience arrive at the same conclusion. Period, thats it.

Also, please accept my apology for misconstruing the intention of your "wake up" comment. It's easy to do in a purely text medium.

The virtual universe is big big money. You have WoW, EQ, etc etc. SL has had a lot of press, and a lot of FBI attention. (One example, I won't tell you about the others, is when the FBI was here because of people crashing the crid).