Massachusetts rejected a ballot initiative to legalize internet poker

[forum_admin]

Lobby Group Fails In Massachusetts Internet Poker Vote Bid

The attorney general of Massachusetts has rejected a ballot initiative to legalize internet poker in the state following a proposal put forward by local members of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA).

Attorney General Martha Coakley wrote to the PPA’s local representatives earlier this week to knock back the lobby group’s proposed ballot question on whether to authorize intrastate online poker in Massachusetts in November’s statewide vote.

The Washington DC-based PPA has previously represented the interests of the online poker sector in legal cases in Pennsylvania, Kentucky and New York, but the action in Massachusetts is the first instance of the lobbying group seeking to attach a vote on online poker to a state ballot paper.

The PPA wanted voters to weigh in on whether Massachusetts should tax and regulate internet poker games offered by sites approved by the state lottery commission, but the initiative was rejected by Coakley after the attorney general said the proposed law’s tax requirements were “highly ambiguous”.

The intrastate poker proposal was submitted to Coakley’s office by the PPA, along with its lawyers from the firm Greenberg Traurig, last month.

The initiative would have amended state laws to specifically declare both the participation in and the offering of internet poker lawful in Massachusetts - providing both the site and its payments providers were approved by the state, and the game did not involve minors aged under 21 years.

More...

Lobby Group Fails In Massachusetts Internet Poker Vote Bid | GamblingCompliance

[forum_admin]

On Tuesday, the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia rejected a challenge launched by the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (IMEGA) against a US federal law related to internet gambling.

IMEGA had challenged the validity of the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) on the grounds that it was unconstitutionally vague.

Congress passed the UIGEA in 2006 to ban online gambling that would be illegal in the state where the individual or gambling business conducts the transaction. The law does not target the bet itself but criminalizes bank or credit card transactions linked to betting.

[Corner]

The online poker law is really complicated and I'm always getting confused with it.
Where is it allowed and where its forbidden ?
How can we be sure if when something appears legal and we think what we do is allowed that we don't do something wrong?
The boundaries are so hard to track in the internet.