Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

Current Thoughts and Solutions to new ban.

Ciaran Laval
Mostly Harmless
Join date: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 7,951
07-26-2007 04:53
From: Howard Larkin
I do believe that Lindens govern by common sense (like.. have you heard of any Gorean villages closed down because of an AR (see 'broadly offensive' blogpost)) and so you don't need to panic.


Not yet, but I'd wager (if I was allowed to) that they will be soon. Where is the common sense in not pointing out that this was coming in clear terms? A certain date whereby this would be illegal? That would have been a common sense approach, giving your customers ample warning that their revenue stream was going to be abolished.
Howard Larkin
Registered User
Join date: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 2
07-26-2007 05:08
I think that ('Keep SL safe..together'-post) was a PR-move... so they could wave it in front of the outside world. I really like gambling, but there are millions of sites for it, gamebookers, betandwin (endless list)etc., but for me, most gambling places in-world didn't do any good.

Actually, splodders would have never gotten in 'trouble' if all the casinos, slot-machines (and all the media hype) hadn't focused attention to gambling-like activities in SL.
Pammie Charming
Registered User
Join date: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 6
Voluntary pot donated games
07-26-2007 06:23
:confused: I just really wish LL would give a list as best they can, being they should know the majority of the popular pot based games that SL offers such as tringo, slingo/DMC, pizza, etc where players at most places are not *REQUIRED* to make a donation/wager to join in the game but yet there is a Linden$ payout from those players who do *choose* to contribute. I know some gaming(not casino) based islands that have been around s/l almost 3 years and the majority of their attraction is pot based games. Has anyone heard a definate answer from a reliable source on tringo, slingo/dmc or pizza games?

Thanks
Klang Wopat
"The Consultant"
Join date: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 212
07-26-2007 07:19
Dammit, Jim, I'm not a gambler, I'm a...well it doesn't really matter what I am, but I don't know anything about gambling. But I do have a hypothetical about gambling in SL:

LL puts some servers in Vegas;
A user in a country where gambling is legal visits a sim that is hosted on the server in Vegas;
The Vegas server has casinos on the sim;
Is this illegal? Gambling is legal at both the client and server ends. Or, is this illegal because it transits the internet?

Or, host some casino sims on servers in Macau or somewhere, so that residents from areas where gambling is legal can access a casino sim in a location where gambling is legal.

It's neither here nor there to me, I just thought it might be an interesting thought experiment.
Kain Cleaver
Registered User
Join date: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 178
07-26-2007 07:21
the basic of pay in + pay out of money combined is gonna be considered gambling unfortunatly.

the only way i could see the token thing working is someone would have to have an alt that would "happen" to be a collecter of tokens lol. since obviously the person cannot be the same person that sells the tokens. but thats really not whats going to work here unfortunatly. as much as i wanna fight against the linden dumbass decision. ultimately i know that it can never stand on stable legs to be marketable.

but there are going to be games now that just wont feel as fun without a true goal to play for.... Games like Slingo will be fun.. yea... but what gave people a drive to play was the fact they had something to actually play for.

its like your a rat.. youve been going through this maze everyday .. you worked so hard to finish the maze in time to get your cheese..mm damn thats good cheese.. one day.. the cheese disapears.. no more cheese.. are you going to wanna bust your ass through that maze ? what if the cheese was replaced with brusslesprouts..??

for those who didnt quite follow.. rats = players cheese = L$ and brustlesprouts = random freebees.

so.. i think our man goal is.. WHAT can we offer thats going to replace ultimate feeling of success we had when we won L$?

do we establish a company that will make items that are so good but ONLY be offered through a Ticket/Point system? what if the latest items were offered via this system.. and could not be bought?

the gameroom owners could pay for exclusive rights to the newest item.. and offer it in their gamerooms.. i think a decision like this would definatly cause a revolution in secondlife and give the casino owners ground again to make money.

I think we should come up with a point system we could use for this. player would pay in their favorate game room to play the games.. and the points would be specific for that gameroom. the most popular places would now be decided on who has the coolest stuff to offer. stores could set up this point system as an alternative to purchase their newest stuff before it hits market.. the potential of this system is insainly doable!

we could rely on a web database or we can do it via objects that keep count.

both have their positives and negitives. i dont think a universal system will work well.. because someone can pay one gameroom and use the tickets on another.. causing the cheaper gamerooms to get all the money and the cool prize ones to lose all the product.

tickets would have to be limited to the gameroom that issues them.. just like real life.
the tickets would have no linden value and stated so.

i plan on programming this system.. and presenting it with items that would recognize it.

however if someone would like to join me i would love to partner up with people who know their stuff and mabey establish a entertainment company that would bring back fun to secondlife.
Ciaran Laval
Mostly Harmless
Join date: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 7,951
07-26-2007 07:25
From: Klang Wopat

LL puts some servers in Vegas;
A user in a country where gambling is legal visits a sim that is hosted on the server in Vegas;
The Vegas server has casinos on the sim;
Is this illegal? Gambling is legal at both the client and server ends. Or, is this illegal because it transits the internet?


I think that's illegal in the US. It's online gambling that's the issue.

From: Klang Wopat
Or, host some casino sims on servers in Macau or somewhere, so that residents from areas where gambling is legal can access a casino sim in a location where gambling is legal.


Tied in with ID verification this could work, all residents of a country where online gambling is banned would not be able to TP there, or would be ejected as soon as they arrived.
Warda Kawabata
Amityville Horror
Join date: 4 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,300
07-26-2007 07:34
From: Klang Wopat
Dammit, Jim, I'm not a gambler, I'm a...well it doesn't really matter what I am, but I don't know anything about gambling. But I do have a hypothetical about gambling in SL:

LL puts some servers in Vegas;
A user in a country where gambling is legal visits a sim that is hosted on the server in Vegas;
The Vegas server has casinos on the sim;
Is this illegal? Gambling is legal at both the client and server ends. Or, is this illegal because it transits the internet?

Or, host some casino sims on servers in Macau or somewhere, so that residents from areas where gambling is legal can access a casino sim in a location where gambling is legal.

It's neither here nor there to me, I just thought it might be an interesting thought experiment.


Vegas: Nope, wouldn't be legal. Online gambling is not legal in any US state.

Macau et alii: Unless LL also has a foolproof method to prove that all gamblers in that sim are from a nation where online gambling is legal, LL will be liable to prosecution. Given their choice of age verification providor, I have my doubts they can find a foolproof nationality verification providor.
_____________________
:) I rent out land on private islands. Message me in-world for details. :)
Elex Dusk
Bunneh
Join date: 19 Oct 2004
Posts: 800
07-26-2007 07:48
Long long ago the Lindens had a rule requiring that for a game to qualify for prize reimbursement it had to be free to play, meaning, a resident could play the game and win the pot though they had paid nothing to play. For example, a bingo pot might be L$1K and out of six-participants only four-contributed, including a small kick from the resident running the game, and the two-participants who contributed nothing to the game pot can still win and collect the pot. [Bingo requires "skill" as the winner has to yell Bingo.]

Casinos will evolve into other things. Some will migrate toward, and even develop their own, skill-based games. The parkade or barcade business models. Themed around one game or a bunch of smaller games.
Shep Korvin
The Lucky Chair Guy
Join date: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 305
07-26-2007 08:13
From: Ciaran Laval
I think that's illegal in the US. It's online gambling that's the issue.


I have a suspicion (putting my legal head on for a moment) that the biggest problem for LL would be the fact that none of the "wagering games" in SL have been legally audited or licensed for gambling purposes. Even in rl situations and locales where gambling is perfectly legal, it's usually *heavily* controlled, regulated and licensed by governing bodies.

Why is that a headache for LL? Well, in the state of California, it's against the law to knowingly have an _unlicenced_ gambling machine on your property. Even if you have absolutely nothing to do with the running and operation of that gambling machine, you still commit an offence purely by housing the device. Technically, any piece of SL hardware which hosts an SL casino could be classed as an unlicenced gambling machine.

I would suspect that _this_ is the true reason for the current clamp-down. SL Gambling finally reached a critical mass where nobody could turn a blind eye to the legalities (and liabilities!) any more.
Bree Giffen
♥♣♦♠ Furrtune Hunter ♠♦♣♥
Join date: 22 Jun 2006
Posts: 2,715
07-26-2007 08:23
How about wagering on IN-WORLD sports? OK well the in-world sporting leagues aren't so big but now is the time. Maybe even betting on silly stuff like having newcomers run through mazes. Hey they'd be camping in a casino anyways. Put them to some use. Wouldn't that be great? All the time and resources spent towards casinos now spent on setting up rather friendly and entertaining events.
_____________________
poopmaster Oh
The Best Person On Earth
Join date: 9 Mar 2007
Posts: 917
07-26-2007 08:32
From: Warda Kawabata
Vegas: Nope, wouldn't be legal. Online gambling is not legal in any US state.

.



online gambling is NOT ILLEGAL in anystate


THE only law that has been passed restricted creditcard companies and banks from transferring funds to gambling sites, there is NO FEDERAL LAW at all banning online gamblingin the usa. local / state laws may apply



Finally, in September 2006, the Congress passed legislation that makes it a crime for a bank or financial institution to transfer money to an online gambling site. The bill that was passed did not include language about the Wire Act that was in previous versions. The bill does not appear to address playing online in any way.




UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT
This title may be cited as the: Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006

SEC. 802.
PROHIBITION ON ACCEPTANCE OF ANY PAYMENT INSTRUMENT FOR UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 53 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
SUBCHAPTER IV
PROHIBITION ON FUNDING OF UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING
§ 5361. Congressional findings and purpose
(a) FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Internet gambling is primarily funded through personal use of payment system instruments, credit cards, and wire transfers.
(2) The National Gambling Impact Study Commission in 1999 recommended the passage of legislation to prohibit wire transfers to Internet gambling sites or the banks which represent such sites.
(3) Internet gambling is a growing cause of debt collection problems for insured depository institutions and the consumer credit industry.
(4) New mechanisms for enforcing gambling laws on the Internet are necessary because traditional law enforcement mechanisms are often inadequate for enforcing gambling prohibitions or regulations on the Internet, especially where such gambling crosses State or national borders.
(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
NO provision of this subchapter shall be construed as altering, limiting, or extending any Federal or State law or Tribal-State compact prohibiting, permitting, or regulating gambling within the United States.

§ 5362. Definitions
In this subchapter:
(1 ) BET OR WAGER.
The term 'bet or wager'—
(A) means the staking or risking by any person of something of value upon the outcome of a contest of others, a sporting event, or a game subject to chance, upon an agreement or understanding that the person or another person will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome;
(B) includes the purchase of a chance or opportunity to win a lottery or other prize (which opportunity to win is predominantly subject to chance);
(C) includes any scheme of a type described in section 3702 of title 28;
(D) includes any instructions or information pertaining to the establishment or movement of funds by the bettor or customer in, to, or from an account with the business of betting or wagering; and
(E) does not include-
(i) any activity governed by the securities laws (as that term is defined in section 3(a)(47) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the purchase or sale of securities (as that term is defined in section 3(a)(10) of that Act);
(ii) any transaction conducted on or subject to the rules of a registered entity or exempt board of trade under the Commodity Exchange Act;
(iii) any over-the-counter derivative instrument;
(iv) any other transaction that
(I) is excluded or exempt from regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act; or
(II) is exempt from State gaming or bucket shop laws under section 12(e) of the Commodity Exchange Act or section 28(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
(v) any contract of indemnity or guarantee;
(vi) any contract for insurance;
(vii) any deposit or other transaction with an insured depository institution;
(viii) participation in any game or contest in which participants do not stake or risk anything of value other than
(I) personal efforts of the participants in playing the game or contest or obtaining access to the Internet; or
(II) points or credits that the sponsor of the game or contest provides to participants free of charge and that can be used or redeemed only for participation in games or contests offered by the sponsor; or
(ix) participation in any fantasy or simulation sports game or educational game or contest in which (if the game or contest involves a team or teams) no fantasy or simulation sports team is based on the current membership of an actual team that is a member of an amateur or professional sports organization (as those terms are defined in section 3701 of title 28) and that meets the following conditions:
(I) All prizes and awards offered to winning participants are established and made known to the participants in advance of the game or contest and their value is not determined by the number of participants or the amount of any fees paid by those participants.
(II) All winning outcomes reflect the relative knowledge and skill of the participants and are determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of the performance of individuals (athletes in the case of sports events) in multiple real-world sporting or other events.
(III) No winning outcome is based
(aa) on the score, pointspread, or any performance or performances of any single real world team or any combination of such teams; or
(bb) solely on any single performance of an individual athlete in any single real-world sporting or other event.

(2) BUSINESS OF BETTING OR WAGERING.
The term 'business of betting or wagering' does not include the activities of a financial transaction provider, or any interactive computer service or telecommunications service.

(3) DESIGNATED PAYMENT SYSTEM.
The term 'designated payment system' means any system utilized by a financial transaction provider that the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, in consultation with the Attorney General, jointly determine, by regulation or order, could be utilized in connection with, or to facilitate, any restricted transaction.

(4) FINANCIAL TRANSACTION PROVIDER.
The term 'financial transaction provider' means a creditor, credit card issuer, financial institution, operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated, money transmitting business, or international, national, regional, or local payment network utilized to effect a credit transaction, electronic fund transfer, stored value product transaction, or money transmitting service, or a participant in such network, or other participant in a designated payment system.

(5) INTERNET.
The term 'Internet' means the international computer network of interoperable packet switched data networks.

(6) INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE.
The term 'interactive computer service' has the meaning given the term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)).

(7) RESTRICTED TRANSACTION.
The term 'restricted transaction' means any transaction or transmittal involving any credit, funds, instrument, or proceeds described in any paragraph of section 5363 which the recipient is prohibited from accepting under section 5363.

(8) SECRETARY.
The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of the Treasury.

(9) STATE.
The term 'State' means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any commonwealth, territory, or other possession of the United States.

(10) UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING.
(A) IN GENERAL.—The term 'unlawful Internet gambling' means to place, receive, or otherwise knowingly transmit a bet or wager by any means which involves the use, at least in part, of the Internet where such bet or wager is unlawful under any applicable Federal or State law in the State or Tribal lands in which the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.
(B) INTRASTATE TRANSACTIONS.
The term 'unlawful Internet gambling' does not inelude placing, receiving, or otherwise transmitting a bet or wager where
(i) the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made exclusively within a single State;
(ii) the bet or wager and the method by which the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made is expressly authorized by and placed in accordance with the laws of such State, and the State law or regulations include-
(I) age and location verification requirements reasonably designed to block access to minors and persons located out of such State; and
(II) appropriate data security standards to prevent unauthorized access by any person whose age and current location has not been verified in accordance with such State's law regulations; and
(iii) the bet or wager does not violate any provision of-
(I) the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
(II) chapter 178 of title 28 (commonly known as the 'Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act');
(III) the Gambling Devices Transportation Act (15 U. S. C. 1171 et seq.); or
(IV) the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
(C) INTRATRIBAL TRANSACTIONS.
The term 'unlawful Internet gambling' does not inelude placing, receiving, or otherwise transmitting a bet or wager where-
(i) the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made exclusively-
(I) within the Indian lands of a single Indian tribe (as such terms are defined under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; or
(II) between the Indian lands of 2 or more Indian tribes to the extent that intertribal gaming is authorized by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act;
(ii) the bet or wager and the method by which the bet or wager is initiated and received or otherwise made is expressly authorized by and complies with the requirements of-
(I) the applicable tribal ordinance or resolution approved by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission; and
(II) with respect to class III gaming, the applicable Tribal-State Compact;
(iii) the applicable tribal ordinance or resolution or Tribal-State compact includes
(I) age and location verification requirements reasonably designed to block access to minors and persons located out of the applicable Tribal lands; and
(II) appropriate data security standards to prevent unauthorized access by any person whose age and current location has not been verified in accordance with the applicable tribal ordinance or resolution or Tribal-State Compact; and
(iv) the bet or wager does not violate any provision of-
(I) the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
(II) chapter 178 of title 28 (commonly known as the 'Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act');
(III) the Gambling Devices Transportation Act (15 U. S. C. 1171 et seq.); or
(IV) the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
(D) INTERSTATE HORSERACING.
(i) IN GENERAL—The term 'unlawful Internet gambling' shall not include any activity that is allowed under the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.).
(ii) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION REGARDING PREEMPTION.
Nothing in this subchapter may be construed to preempt any State law prohibiting gambling.
(iii) SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that this subchapter shall not change which activities related to horse racing may or may not be allowed under Federal law. This subparagraph is intended to address concerns that this subchapter could have the effect of changing the existing relationship between the Interstate Horseracing Act and other Federal statutes in effect on the date of the enactment of this subchapter. This subchapter is not intended to change that relationship. This subchapter is not intended to resolve any existing disagreements over how to interpret the relationship between the Interstate Horseracing Act and other Federal statutes.
(E) INTERMEDIATE ROUTING.
The intermediate routing of electronic data shall not determine the location or locations in which a bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.

(11) OTHER TERMS.
(A) CREDIT; CREDITOR; CREDIT CARD; AND CARD ISSUER.
The terms 'credit', 'creditor', 'credit card', and 'card issuer' have the meanings given the terms in section 103 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1602).
(B) ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFER.
The term 'electronic fund transfer'
(i) has the meaning given the term in section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 U. S. C . 1693a), except that the term includes transfers that would otherwise be excluded under section 903(6)(E) of that Act; and
(ii) includes any fund transfer covered by Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code, as in effect in any State.
(C) FINANCIAL INSTITUTION.
The term 'financial institution' has the meaning given the term in section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, except that such term does not include a casino, sports book, or other business at or through which bets or wagers may be placed or received.
(D) INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION.
The term 'insured depository institution'—
(i) has the meaning given the term in section 3(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(c)); and
(ii) includes an insured credit union (as defined in section 101 of the Federal Credit Union Act)
(E) MONEY TRANSMITTING BUSINESS AND MONEY TRANSMITTING SERVICE .
The terms 'money transmitting business' and 'money transmitting service' have the meanings given the terms in section 5330(d) (determined without regard to any regulations prescribed by the Secretary thereunder).

§ 5363. Prohibition on acceptance of any financial instrument for unlawful Internet gambling
No person engaged in the business of betting or wagering may knowingly accept, in connection with the participation of another person in unlawful Internet gambling-
(1) credit, or the proceeds of credit, extended to or on behalf of such other person (including credit extended through the use of a credit card);
(2) an electronic fund transfer, or funds transmitted by or through a money transmitting business, or the proceeds of an electronic fund transfer or money transmitting service, from or on behalf of such other person;
(3) any check, draft, or similar instrument which is drawn by or on behalf of such other person and is drawn on or payable at or through any finanvial institution; or
(4) the proceeds of any other form of financial transaction, as the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may jointly prescribe by regulation, which involves a financial institution as a payor or financial intermediary on behalf of or for the benefit of such other person.

§ 5364. Policies and procedures to identify and prevent restricted transactions
(a) REGULATIONS.
Before the end of the 270-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this subchapter, the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall prescribe regulations (which the Secretary and the Board jointly determine to be appropriate) requiring each designated payment system, and all participants therein, to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit restricted transactions through the establishment of policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of restricted transactions in any of the following ways:
(1) The establishment of policies and procedures that-
(A) allow the payment system and any person involved in the payment system to identify restricted transactions by means of codes in authorization messages or by other means; and
(B) block restricted transactions identified as a result of the policies and procedures developed pursuant to subparagraph (A).
(2) The establishment of policies and procedures that prevent or prohibit the acceptance of the products or services of the payment system in connection with a restricted transaction.
(b) REQUIREMENTS FOR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
In prescribing regulations under subsection (a), the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall-
(1) identify types of policies and procedures, including nonexclusive examples, which would be deemed, as applicable, to be reasonably designed to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of the products or services with respect to each type of restricted transaction;
(2) to the extent practical, permit any participant in a payment system to choose among alternative means of identifying and blocking, or otherwise preventing or prohibiting the acceptance of the products or services of the payment system or participant in connection with, restricted transactions;
(3) exempt certain restricted transactions or designated payment systems from any requirement imposed under such regulations, if the Secretary and the Board jointly find that it is not reasonably practical to identify and block, or otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of, such transactions; and
(4) ensure that transactions in connection with any activity excluded from the definition of unlawful internet gambling in subparagraphs (B), (C), or (D)(i) of section 5362(10) are not blocked or otherwise prevented or prohibited by the prescribed regulations.
(c) COMPLIANCE WITH PAYMENT SYSTEM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
A financial transaction provider shall be considered to be in compliance with the regulations prescribed under subsection (a) if-
(1) such person relies on and complies with the policies and procedures of a designated payment system of which it is a member or participant to-
(A) identify and block restricted transactions; or
(B) otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of the products or services of the payment system, member, or participant in connection with restricted transactions; and
(2) such policies and procedures of the designated payment system comply with the requirements of regulations prescribed under subsection (a).
(d) NO LIABILITY FOR BLOCKING OR REFUSING TO HONOR RESTRICTED TRANSACTIONS.
A person that identifies and blocks a transaction, prevents or prohibits the acceptance of its products or services in connection with a transaction, or otherwise refuses to honor a transaction-
(1) that is a restricted transaction;
(2) that such person reasonably believes to be a restricted transaction; or
(3) as a designated payment system or a member of a designated payment system in reliance on the policies and procedures of the payment system, in an effort to comply with regulations prescribed under subsection (a), shall not be liable to any party for such action.
(e) REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT.
The requirements under this section shall be enforced exclusively by-
(1) the Federal functional regulators, with respect to the designated payment systems and financial transaction providers subject to the respective jurisdiction of such regulators under section 505(a) of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and section 5g of the Commodities Exchange Act; and
(2) the Federal Trade Commission, with respect to designated payment systems and financial transaction providers not otherwise subject to the jurisdiction of any Federal functional regulators (ineluding the Commission) as described in paragraph (1).

§ 5365. Civil remedies
(a) JURISDICTION.—In addition to any other remedy under current law, the district courts of the United States shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to prevent and restrain restricted transactions by issuing appropriate orders in accordance with this section, regardless of whether a prosecution has been initiated under this subchapter.
(b) PROCEEDINGS.
(1) INSTITUTION BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
(A) IN GENERAL.
The United States, acting through the Attorney General, may institute proceedings under this section to prevent or restrain a restricted transaction.
(B) RELIEF.
Upon application of the United States under this paragraph, the district court may enter a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or an injunction against any person to prevent or restrain a restricted transaction, in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
(2) INSTITUTION BY STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
(A) IN GENERAL.
The attorney general (or other appropriate State official) of a State in which a restricted transaction allegedly has been or will be initiated, received, or otherwise made may institute proceedings under this section to prevent or restrain the violation or threatened violation.
(B) RELIEF.
Upon application of the attorney general (or other appropriate State official) of an affected State under this paragraph, the district court may enter a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or an injunction against any person to prevent or restrain a restricted transaction, in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
(3) INDIAN LANDS.
(A) IN GENERAL.
Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), for a restricted transaction that allegedly has been or will be initiated, received, or otherwise made on Indian lands (as that term is defined in section 4 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act)-
(i) the United States shall have the enforcement authority provided under paragraph (1); and
(ii) the enforcement authorities specified in an applicable Tribal-State compact negotiated under section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2710)shall be carried out in accordance with that compact.
(B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
No provision of this section shall be construed as altering, superseding, or otherwise affecting the application of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
(c) LIMITATION RELATING TO INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICES.
(1) IN GENERAL.
Relief granted under this section against an interactive computer service shall-
(A) be limited to the removal of, or disabling of access to, an online site violating section 5363, or a hypertext link to an online site violating such section, that resides on a computer server that such service controls or operates, except that the limitation in this subparagraph shall not apply if the service is subject to liability under this section under section 5367;
(B) be available only after notice to the interactive computer service and an opportunity for the service to appear are provided;
(C) not impose any obligation on an interactive computer service to monitor its service or to affirmatively seek facts indicating activity violating this subchapter;
(D) specify the interactive computer service to which it applies; and
(E) specifically identify the location of the online site or hypertext link to be removed or access to which is to be disabled.
(2) COORDINATION WITH OTHER LAW.
An interactive computer service that does not violate this subchapter shall not be liable under section 1084(d) of title 18, except that the limitation in this paragraph shall not apply if an interactive computer service has actual knowledge and control of bets and wagers and-
(A) operates, manages, supervises, or directs an Internet website at which unlawful bets or wagers may be placed, received, or otherwise made or at which unlawful bets or wagers are offered to be placed, received, or otherwise made; or
(B) owns or controls, or is owned or controlled by, any person who operates, manages, supervises, or directs an Internet website at which unlawful bets or wagers may be placed, received, or otherwise made, or at which unlawful bets or wagers are offered to be placed, received, or otherwise made.
(d) LIMITATION ON INJUNCTIONS AGAINST REGULATED PERSONS.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, and subject to section 5367, no provision of this subchapter shall be construed as authorizing the Attorney General of the United States, or the attorney general (or other appropriate State official) of any State to institute proceedings to prevent or restrain a restricted transaction against any financial transaction provider, to the extent that the person is acting as a financial transaction provider.

§ 5366. Criminal penalties
(a) IN GENERAL.
Any person who violates section 5363 shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
(b) PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
Upon conviction of a person under this section, the court may enter a permanent injunction enjoining such person from placing, receiving, or otherwise making bets or wagers or sending, receiving, or inviting information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers.

§ 5367. Circumventions prohibited
Notwithstanding section 5362(2), a financial transaction provider, or any interactive computer service or telecommunications service, may be liable under this subchapter if such person has actual knowledge and control of bets and wagers, and-
(1) operates, manages, supervises, or directs an Internet website at which unlawful bets or wagers may be placed, received, or otherwise made, or at which unlawful bets or wagers are offered to be placed, received, or otherwise made; or
(2) owns or controls, or is owned or controlled by, any person who operates, manages, supervises, or directs an Internet website at which unlawful bets or wagers may be placed, received, or otherwise made, or at which unlawful bets or wagers are offered to be placed, received, or otherwise made."
(b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.
The table of sections for chapter 53 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
SUBCHAPTER IV-PROHIBITION ON FUNDING OF UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING
5361. Congressional findings and purpose
5362. Definitions
5363. Prohibition on acceptance of any financial instrument for unlawful Internet gambling
5364. Policies and procedures to identify and prevent restricted transactions 5365. Civil remedies
5366. Criminal penalties
5367. Circumventions prohibited.

SEC. 803.
INTERNET GAMBLING IN OR THROUGH FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS.
(a) IN GENERAL.
In deliberations between the United States Government and any foreign country on money laundering, corruption, and crime issues, the United States Government should
(1) encourage cooperation by foreign governments and relevant international fora in identifying whether Internet gambling operations are being used for money laundering, corruption, or other crimes;
(2) advance policies that promote the cooperation of foreign governments, through information sharing or other measures, in the enforcement of this Act; and
(3) encourage the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering, in its annual report on money laundering typologies, to study the extent to which Internet gambling operations are being used for money laundering purposes.
(b) REPORT REQUIRED.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall submit an annual report to the Congress on any deliberations between the United States and other countries on issues relating to Internet gambling.
_____________________
InSL u find every kind of no-life retard you could possibly imagine as well as a few even Tim Burton couldnt imagine u find 12yr-olds claiming to be 40 men claiming 2 be women, women claiming 2 make sense and every1 claiming 2 have ideas that are actually worth a damn if only someone would just listen to their unique innovative and exceptionally important idea
SqueezeOne Pow
World Changer
Join date: 21 Dec 2005
Posts: 1,437
07-26-2007 08:40
I love how you guys are outlining all your work-arounds of LL policy on the SL forums.

Use some of that creativity you guys have! Make speak-easies!! It would be so easy to do in SL as opposed to RL since one person can essentially carry a whole building in their pocket!!!

Sure there'd be a risk...but they payout should be worth it!!

Besides, you think LL really has the man-power to police this stuff? It's going to be on a "citizens on patrol" basis where they think about responding to ARs! You got it easier than the mobsters did even in Prohibition times!!!

I say go all out, guys!
_____________________
Semper Fly
-S1. Pow

"Violence is Art by another means"

Visit Squeeze One Plaza in Osteria. Come for the robots, stay for the view!http://slurl.com/secondlife/Osteria/160.331/203.881
Lindal Kidd
Dances With Noobs
Join date: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 8,371
07-26-2007 08:42
From: Bree Giffen
All the time and resources spent towards casinos now spent on setting up rather friendly and entertaining events.


And I think that's just what Lindens are hoping will happen. Bree, you're the first one, I think, that's even hinted at an important aspect of this gambling ban: SL, like any world, is resource-limited. Here, the resources are prims and processor cycles. Casinos use up a lot of the world's resources. Take away the casinos, and those resources become available for other pursuits.

"Clean" games, better builds, new features of the interface, etc.

Maybe we, taking the SL population as a whole, have been falling into a rut, and trying to make SL just like the Real World. Or maybe it's just that old human motivation to make a buck the easy way...and gambling was an easy and profitable way to make a $Linden.

I'm disheartened by the way LL seems to be reversing their hands-off policy of letting the world develop as it will...it's been a great social experiment. There have been some amazing and wonderful outcomes. But there have also been some less wonderful ones...ad farms, casinos, various scams and ripoffs, sleazy strip mall landscapes...Maybe, given human nature, some limits ARE needed to ensure the most enjoyment for everyone.

Having unburdened herself of that weighty philosophy, Lindal goes shopping for waterfalls! :)
Lindal Kidd
Dances With Noobs
Join date: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 8,371
07-26-2007 08:51
Kain,

The issue would probably have to be resolved by the lawyers and poltiicians, but to this country girl, the Linden dollar itself seems to be a "token". LL has always insisted that the $L has no monetary value...just like a poker chip. But poker chips can be bought with dollars and redeemed for dollars. So can $L.

I don't think that introducing another layer of, um, tokenicity, would be a valid way around the gambling ban.

My beef with 'em is that they've defined poker as a "game of chance." I'm pretty sure it's not...I've lost at poker far too often for it to be governed by a random process. ;)
Kitty Barnett
Registered User
Join date: 10 May 2006
Posts: 5,586
07-26-2007 08:57
From: Lindal Kidd
LL has always insisted that the $L has no monetary value...just like a poker chip. But poker chips can be bought with dollars and redeemed for dollars. So can $L.
LL only states L$ aren't redeemable by Linden Lab, and they're not. You can exchange money for poker chips in a casino, but they will also redeem them back for money when you cash out.

L$ don't have any inherent monetary value, the value comes from what other residents are willing to pay for them.
Ylikone Obscure
Amatuer Troll
Join date: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 335
07-26-2007 08:58
Maybe the only "work-around" is to get a US gambling license. That would make it all legal, correct? But as if anybody would bother to go through the trouble and expense.
poopmaster Oh
The Best Person On Earth
Join date: 9 Mar 2007
Posts: 917
07-26-2007 09:01
that wont work

no Matter the LEGAL STATUS

SL can set whatever rules they want

they set the rules

no gamblin


no gettin roun it
_____________________
InSL u find every kind of no-life retard you could possibly imagine as well as a few even Tim Burton couldnt imagine u find 12yr-olds claiming to be 40 men claiming 2 be women, women claiming 2 make sense and every1 claiming 2 have ideas that are actually worth a damn if only someone would just listen to their unique innovative and exceptionally important idea
Kain Cleaver
Registered User
Join date: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 178
07-26-2007 09:01
i think you are missing my overall discussion.

Tokens would not be traded back for money in my solution.

tokens would be used to trade in for product. in most cases exclusive product that can only be obtained by the tokens.

Think of it like Secondlifes version of Chuck E Cheese. or a Boardwalk.

You pay money to play the games.. but insted of recieving money back you get tokens/points/tickets. these tokens/points/tickets will hold NO Linden/US Value at all. much like real tokens. you cant goto bestbuy with your chuck e cheese tokens and expect to buy a tv.

the tokens/points/tickets would be limited to use in the places they were won at.
Jack Digeridoo
machinimaniac
Join date: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 1,170
07-26-2007 09:06
From: Elex Dusk
Long long ago the Lindens had a rule requiring that for a game to qualify for prize reimbursement it had to be free to play, meaning, a resident could play the game and win the pot though they had paid nothing to play.



Lindens never had any rules about any games. Sounds like you are talking about getting $L for hosting an event way back...
_____________________
If you'll excuse me, it's, it's time to make the world safe for democracy.
Lindal Kidd
Dances With Noobs
Join date: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 8,371
07-26-2007 09:16
From: Kitty Barnett
L$ don't have any inherent monetary value, the value comes from what other residents are willing to pay for them.


But, Kitty...isn't that the definition of ANY currency? I mean, how much ACTUAL value does those bits of paper in your wallet that say "One United States Dollar" have? None at all, except maybe as a firestarter. Their value comes from the fact that we have, collectively, agreed to use them as "tokens" which can be exchanged for things of actual value.

The only reason poker chips aren't a "currency" is that they have no value outside of the gaming environment. Same-same with $L. No value outside SL...but they CAN be bought, and CAN be redeemed, for "real" currencies.

Dang it...I thought I'd never have to repeat ECON 101, and here I am, back again. Nooooo...I wanna go SHOPPING!
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
07-26-2007 09:17
Its the ultimate testiment to how little input the lindens put in to the forums -

When people feel comfortable making threads about how to get around the new rules on the offical SL forums.
Lindal Kidd
Dances With Noobs
Join date: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 8,371
07-26-2007 09:18
From: poopmaster Oh
that wont work

no Matter the LEGAL STATUS

SL can set whatever rules they want

they set the rules

no gamblin


no gettin roun it


Gee, Poopy, why didn't you say that in the first place, instead of posting half the US Code? I could have saved half an hour, easy. :)
Lindal Kidd
Dances With Noobs
Join date: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 8,371
07-26-2007 09:25
From: Kain Cleaver
the tokens/points/tickets would be limited to use in the places they were won at.


Yes, I'd missed that. I thought you were saying that your tokens could be redeemed for $L.

That might stand a chance of being allowed under the new rules...but would it be profitable? You'll have to have "prizes" that appeal to a wide audience. You could maybe run such a gaming room as an adjunct to some of the larger and more popular SL stores and draw people in with the lure of maybe being able to get something that they don't have the $L to buy right off the shelf.

But it'd be a big risk, because I don't think you'll get LL to rule on it BEFORE it's tried. You'd have to make the investment in setting it up, and then wait to see what happened.
Domaiv Decosta
Registered User
Join date: 3 Jun 2007
Posts: 243
07-26-2007 09:31
The problem lies with the govenment of the so called "land of the free". I just don't understand that you have the right to bear arms yet you can't spend your hard earned as you wish. The online gamblers need to lobby Washington and get the law changed.
Lindal Kidd
Dances With Noobs
Join date: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 8,371
07-26-2007 09:41
From: Domaiv Decosta
The problem lies with the govenment of the so called "land of the free". I just don't understand that you have the right to bear arms yet you can't spend your hard earned as you wish. The online gamblers need to lobby Washington and get the law changed.


They do it for our own good, Domaiv...the same as any intrusive meddling bunch of do-gooders in any country or society...including LL. Sometimes I agree with 'em, sometimes not. Depends on my mood and how much their do-gooding affects the things I like to do.

Don't be all surprised. Laws, especially if they've been given time to accumulate and evolve, seldom make sense.
1 2 3 4 5