- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The last paragraph of the official DOJ statement reads like this:
Given that the Wire Act does not reach interstate transmissions of wire communications
that do not relate to a “sporting event or contest,” and that the state-run lotteries proposed by
New York and Illinois do not involve sporting events or contests, we conclude that the Wire Act
does not prohibit the lotteries described in these proposals. In light of that conclusion, we need
not consider how to reconcile the Wire Act with UIGEA, because the Wire Act does not apply
in this situation. Accordingly, we express no view about the proper interpretation or scope of
UIGEA.Merry Xmas to all!
Wow so this is really wonderful news. I guess those who ate the spoon fed garbage about affiliates having to worry about promoting US facing casinos can see the light.
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!
Ill be happy when i see playtech and microgaming re-enter the market.
Based on Nelson Rose’s article, where he uses Canadian Provinces as a model which individual states might follow, I am worried that there will be no way for affiliates to make money when state governments have a monopoly on licensing.
I don’t see any way for affiliates to make money promoting Canadian Provincial online gambling sites…as a previous post at CAP commented: Canada Set to Offer More Online Gambling Services | Casino Affiliate Programs
Like Nelson Rose pointed out, there will be no need for Federal Poker laws if each state is allowed to regulate online gambling.
What will stop each state from restricting legal play to One Online Company – thus killing competition and any need for Affiliate Marketing?
I see the Brick and Mortar Casinos building partnerships with Online Brands, and then trying to cut exclusive deals with individual states to run all of the online gambling.
So, if Caesar’s Palace or Harrah’s gets the online franchise for a state like Illinois, then where is the upside for Affiliates?
Heppy New Year!
Mitja
