Let your mouth speak archive

In the international online gambling news the Australian issues seem to be the most interesting. Not only is the current government hanging by a few seats hinging in a big way on the laws regarding internet wagering and poker machines but religious factions are pitted against the entertainment industry.
Now as one would expect there comes into the fray the internet service providers. The Internet Industry Association of Australia is cautioning against placing the responsibility of protecting problem gamblers on internet service providers, instead making the argument that problem gambling must be managed at the point of service access.

The IIA just introduced it review of the Interactive Gambling Act of 2001. The conclusion the group arrived at said the banning of online betting sites was too difficult to make effective. Their submission read, “The IIA believes that the point of consumption, that is, the end user's device, is the only effective and technically feasible way of controlling access to content on the Internet,”
Having the responsibility of controlling consumer content is also cost prohibitive the IIA contends. The amount of data and applications related to internet gambling is staggering and impossible for Internet Service Providers to police. The review submission continued, “as well as online platforms, which are used by content and service providers to distribute their content and/or services, including gambling content and/or services, should not have gatekeeper responsibilities placed upon them.”

Advocating a regulated licensing model with strict requirements on licensees, the IIA said these measures would help reduce harm and maintain community welfare. On that subject the submission also said, “Not only can problem gamblers access online gaming services provided by offshore providers, who operate under a variety of regulatory regimes, recreational gamblers also can resort to those offshore providers,” It continued, “In other words, Australian online gamblers who participate at offshore sites forego the protection of Australian law and harm reduction requirements when they use offshore gambling providers.” :thumbsup

Hi,
We have played poker etc for like 10 years now online. whats the new thing we could play?

I think I know what the next big thing is...

😁

Tell me :dirol

I knows a couple of people in the gaming industy. I heard about this idea for almost a year ago. If you will know what it is send me a private message with your email adress. I can connect you to them because you seems to be a guy who are very interested of gaming business.

cheers

It is a wonderful article. Sometimes we feel depressed, at this time we need to break it out, so the forum is the best place, it can be asked and answer it.

Ashton Kutcher's life has been unraveling fast since he scored the gig of taking over Charlie Sheen's spot on Two and a Half Men.

After Kutcher went on Twitter to defend Joe Paterno, after issuing an apology, he is now claiming he isn't qualified to speak to 8 million people. D'uh!

After an embarrassing fiasco where Ashton tweeted about Paterno's firing saying, "How do you fire Jo Pa? #insult #noclass as a hawkeye fan I find it in poor taste."

Kutcher's twitter then blew up with angry people informing him that Paterno was fired because he covered up a child rape. Kutcher removed his original post and then tweeted, then wrote, "Heard Joe was fired, fully recant previous tweet! Didn't have full story. #admitwhenYoumakemistakes."

Kutcher just posted a message on his blog, telling his fans that he has decided to turn over control of his Twitter account to his management team, who will basically filter all of Kutcher's tweets. Because writing a sentence on Twitter can be a difficult task, Kutcher writes, "Up until today I have posted virtually everyone of my tweets on my own, but clearly the platform has become to (sic) big to be managed by a single individual."

He continued, "While I will continue to express myself through @Aplusk I'm going to turn the management of the feed over to my team at Katalyst Media to ensure the quality of it's content."

Apparently, Kutcher has not handed everything off to his editing team, since he wrote, "It was a mistake that I don't think will not happen again."

After a fairly positive hearing at the end of October, a House of Representatives subcommittee will meet again next week to discuss online gambling and poker and any potential legislation.

The House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade and its chairperson, Rep. Mary Bono-Mack of California, have scheduled more hearings on the issue of internet gambling for November 18th. After a hearing on October 25th, Rep. Bono-Mack stated that there would be follow-up hearings to continue the discussion, and the November hearing is timed almost perfectly. Next week’s hearing will be the day after a gathering of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which will be meeting to discuss how tribes can get in on potential internet gambling.

That October hearing generated interest due to the fact that the overall message from the legislators was fairly positive. Texas Representative Joe Barton, the Republican who has pushed legislation that would regulate and legalize online poker in the United States and a member of Rep. Bono-Mack’s committee, led a strong charge and, for the most part, was backed by a host of witnesses who appeared before the committee.

Witnesses such as Parry Aftab, the chairwoman of the Board of Advisors for FairPlayUSA, and former Senator and current chairman of the Poker Players Alliance Alfonse D’Amato, among others, testified in front of the House subcommittee that regulation of the industry was better than the prohibition of online gambling. While D’Amato was the only one who was definitively pro-online poker, many of the other advocates were surprisingly neutral on the issue but leaning towards regulation. As such, that October House subcommittee meeting has fueled the fires that online poker legislation, at the minimum, is a possibility.

In discussing the upcoming hearing, Michael Waxman, a spokesman for the Safe and Secure Internet Gambling Initiative, stated to the Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Steve Tetreault, “The flurry of hearings clearly shows how momentum is building for Congress to move on this issue.” At this moment, there hasn’t been any witnesses announced for the November hearing, but such a list is expected at the midpoint of next week.

One of the potential methods for introducing online poker regulation is quickly reaching its endgame. The “supercommittee” created from equal number of Democratic and Republican House and Senate members to suggest methods of deficit reduction is scheduled to present its findings on November 23rd. There has been a tremendous amount of lobbying by the poker community towards the members of the “supercommittee” to include legislation which would regulate and legalize online poker, not only to protect customers but also to bring in revenues. With less than two weeks until that Thanksgiving Eve deadline, there has been little movement from either side on several key issues and it is unknown if the online gaming question has been in the discussions.

All of the political action in Washington, DC, has the “brick and mortar” casino industry drawing their cards, so to speak, in teaming up with online operations for potential internet gaming options. Last week, MGM Resorts International and Boyd Gaming joined forces with Bwin.Party Digital Entertainment for a proposed partnership that would become operational once the U. S. government clarifies their online gaming and poker laws, while Caesars Entertainment already has such an operation in place, through 888 Holdings PLC and a World Series of Poker branded online card room (for players outside of the U. S.), that could be expanded to accept American action. Other operations, such as Fertitta Enterprises (owners of Station Casinos) in Las Vegas and the California card rooms The Bicycle Casino and the Commerce Casino, have started “free play” options online that could be easily converted to real money operations once regulated.

The “wild card” in any potential legislation may come from the Indian tribes and their casino operations. During the October hearings, Ernest Stevens, the chairman of the National Indian Gaming Association, was the most reluctant speaker about the potential for internet gaming, instead more interested in preserving the Indian tribes’ sovereign rights to be a player in internet gaming and be able to maintain a tax-exempt status.

Next week’s hearing, as well as the “supercommittee” report coming in less than two weeks, will give a good indication of where any potential legislation regarding online poker and gaming overall stands. Poker News Daily will continue to monitor the situation and report on the upcoming moves in Washington, DC, over the next couple of weeks.

The gambler always thinks he’s going to win.

The gambler always thinks this time he’s got his game on, that he’s holding a lucky hand, that the move he’s about to make is the one to save him from the losing streak.

That’s the illusion the gaming industry sells.

It’s the same brand of illusion the suave Malaysian and Las Vegas casino moguls making the rounds in South Florida are peddling to the populace, the press and politicians all too eager to applaud ready-made deals.

Already, the gaming tables are set up:

• Malaysia’s Genting bought the waterfront land of the Omni-Miami Herald properties and set up shop in Tallahassee to procure casino gambling approval from the Legislature to build the world’s largest casino complex — 5,200 hotel rooms, some 50 restaurants and three times the gambling space of the largest casino in Las Vegas.

• Vegas mogul Steve Wynn wants the Miami Beach Convention Center site and made his pitch Wednesday to the mayor and the city manager over a lunch of our famous stone crabs, no less. (An ironic setting given that one of the big fears is that family-owned businesses like Joe’s Stone Crab are likely to loose from the displacement such a drastic transformation of our tourism economy would bring, but this is not an industry that worries about moral gestures).

• And both Wynn and Las Vegas’ Sands have eyed 20 acres of land near the old Miami Arena site, known as the Miami World Center, as an ideal spot for another mega casino resort.

Anybody else feel like hanging a “No Trespassing” sign?

Not the town’s gamblers, those local leaders who think they’re holding the winning hand.

Not state Sen. Ellyn Bogdanoff, a Republican from Fort Lauderdale who says she wants “an intellectually honest debate” — then proceeds to brand as anti-capitalists anyone who opposes casino gambling resorts in Miami.

Not the hired hands of the casino moguls, who’re busy promising that casino resorts will bring thousands of jobs to the unemployed masses and lure hundreds of thousands of high-end, game-loving tourists from Asia and Latin America.

Jobs and tourists flowing into Miami like coins from a bell-ringing jackpot.

Those willing to gamble away Miami’s future on such promises made their exaggerated pitches this week to the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, throwing around lots of billion-dollar figures to rousing applause.

A gamblers’ delusion is heady stuff.

But those multi-billion-dollar investments are only a win-win for casino owners tapped out in their markets and in need of new revenues (and maybe for locals already on their payroll). When it comes to operations, the gambling industry will bring its people, the unemployed in Vegas and elsewhere with experience in the industry, for whom running a new casino in a fantasy location like Miami will be a promotion.

Resort casinos would bring almost a million more tourists a month to Miami-Dade and Broward, according to the math of St. Thomas Business School Dean Tony Villamil, whose firm was hired by Genting to do an economic impact study.

This illusion is easier to dash: Ever heard of an economist, or any expert for that matter, hired by a firm come up with an opposing view? And who wants one million more tourists a month on our inadequate roads, tapping our water and sewer and emergency services? This is home, you know.

We’re in a recession like everyone else, but we don’t need the quick-fix charity of a dominant, insular, and highly risky industry that has done little to elevate the places where it exists. The promoters can’t point to a single place in the United States we can compare to, but urge us to check out Singapore, and are so condescending they venture to add that we’ve probably never been there, and thus wouldn’t know all we’re missing.

Hogwash. They need us.

Tourists from around the world already come to South Florida for all we have to offer — a unique geography, enviable beaches, world-class cuisine served in distinctive award-winning restaurants, world-class arts, a variety of special annual events, and a diverse, international culture. We deliver high-end, middle-end and budget vacations a short drive from the Keys and Walt Disney World. We’ve a got vibrant port, a cruise ship industry and sporting franchises.

We already attract the South American crowd, that’s why the gambling moguls are working so hard to be here, to siphon what we already have, what has taken us decades to build. For our established businesses to cash-in on the growing Asian tourism market, we don’t need casino gambling, but a targeted strategy from business leaders.

We’re being dealt a losing hand, and we’ve got little to gain and a lot to lose.

Legislators left Springfield on Thursday without taking a vote in either the House or Senate on gambling-expansion bills that include a casino in Danville.

And Sen. Mike Frerichs, D-Champaign, suggested there may not be enough support for a new gambling-expansion bill this year.

"We're going to keep working, but we may need to work into the new year before we get a final resolution," Frerichs said after the Senate failed to vote on a bill that adds five casinos to the existing 10 and permits slot machines at racetracks. "There are just limited days left, one special session day between now and the end of the year. And I don't think something like this is going to get passed in one day."

Frerichs, whose district includes Danville, said the failure of a gambling expansion bill in the House on Thursday "was a setback."

"Part of that was that there just weren't enough people there" he said, noting that two House members who had voted for a similar gambling bill earlier this year were absent Wednesday. "If we had held it on a day when everyone was present, I feel pretty confident it would have passed. But I think it just shows the difficulty putting together some sort of a deal."

If the bill doesn't get approved on Nov. 29, the Legislature's last scheduled day of action, it could be a long winter for supporters of a Danville casino. After that, the House isn't scheduled to return to Springfield until Jan. 31, according to a schedule distributed Thursday.

Danville Alderman Michael Puhr, who was at the Capitol on Thursday, said he was disappointed but thought a bill could get 60 or more votes in the House. Even so, it would need 71 votes to overcome an anticipated veto by Gov. Pat Quinn.

"If we get 60, there maybe could be some dialogue with the governor," Puhr said. "Maybe he could see that the senators and representatives are trying to address some of his concerns. Let's face it, this is a stimulus bill. We need the jobs and we need to help the horse business in Illinois."

Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, who sponsored the gambling expansion in the House, said 71 votes "might be possible when we return."

Lang also said he didn't call for another House vote Thursday because Speaker Michael Madigan "didn't want another vote on the same bill that failed" Wednesday.

Lang again criticized Quinn "for using many state resources and many state personnel yesterday that could have been doing other things in an effort to defeat this very good piece of legislation."

And he asserted that Quinn's calls to legislators were ineffective.

"I will tell you further that not one single person who voted no yesterday ... voted no because of any effort by the governor's office," Lang said. "I hate to see him wasting valuable time and state personnel to kill one measly little bill of mine. Maybe they've got better things to do with their careers."

After much hard work and thought (not!) Kris Humphries and Kim Kardashian are throwing in the towel. They just couldn't make it work.

Kris is using Minnesota-based attorney Lee Hutton, who repped Humphries during the pre-nup discussions.

With an iron-clad pre-nup in place, there won't be any disputes when it comes to dividing up the assets and both parties will walk away with what they came with.

The divorce will become final 6 months from the date Kim filed – Halloween – which is exactly one year after the day they met.

The media reported that there was an attempt at reconciliation, but in actuality, Kim had just wanted a face-to-face with Kris to get some closure.

"He doesn't want a war. He's lying low," a source close to the 26-year-old athlete told E! News yesterday.

The lobby groups for internet poker are plenty in the American jurisdiction and the effect the groups are having on the online gambling situation seems to be coming to a head. Separating facts from fiction is what the debate is about. The big argument in online poker issue is skill versus luck. Officially the government is stuck on the pure chance side and gives lip service to those who are putting huge amounts of money and time into convincing the majority otherwise.
Enter the FairPlay USA Organization which some say is the ultimate in lobby groups as they seek to strengthen the argument for legal online gambling by pointing out the dangers of illegal online gambling. FairPlay USA was formed by a group of consumer protection experts, lawmakers, professional poker players and online gambling companies, who all on the same track, putting forth a concerted and consolidated effort for change.
There is an online petition presented on the organization’s web site as a method to engage the millions of internet poker players in the States who want to play in a safe and regulated environment where their money and personal information is protected.

FairPlay USA has also published 10 principles on how to play online poker legally. The group’s principles include strengthening the UIGEA in order to clear the decks of illegal online gambling sites in America. They also advocate the use of today’s latest technology to determine age limitations and give problem gamblers a source of effective help.
The organization is dedicated to explaining the financial benefits for jurisdictions in the States that would allow online poker and other internet wagering activities. The facts suggest that besides the taxation and licensing revenues there is the prospect of thousands of jobs related to the online gambling industry. The safety, the revenues, the social responsibility, among other issues are compelling reasons for the politicians to see that legalizing and regulating online gambling is a better idea.

While most online gambling is not allowed to the Australian public, this does not stop them playing at offshore sites. However, the Government is taking a serious look at changing the law, and currently Australian online sports-betting companies are actually allowed to operate online with restrictions. These companies rightfully claim that with restrictions in place, they have very little chance of competing against offshore sports-betting sites.

Currently the Federal Government is reviewing the Interactive Gambling Act of 2001 (IGA), and online business Sportsbet claims that current regulations should also be amended while they awaiting review of these changes. What Australian online bookmakers want is ‘in-the-run’ betting. We call it ‘in-play betting’ and it refers to the placing of wagers after an event has commenced. “Betting after an event has commenced is available over the phone and in retail outlets in Australia,” the submission reads.

For example betting on the outcome of the goals in a football game, at the start of the second half in game time. This gives punters more of an advantage to use their judgment, and actually makes sports betting much more of a skill game, than a game of pure unadulterated luck, therefore not gambling but become more of a strategist. This option is also much more fair when looked at from the bigger picture, where consistency is important for player protection.

While Australian-based websites are prohibited from the ‘in-play’ practice, other offshore sites are not. It is a popular way to play in the UK for example. Online operators want this particular matter looked at as a separate entity, because they believe it is so important to their ability to compete on a level playing field. It is actually also a matter of platform neutrality, as ‘in-the-run’ betting is allowed to take place in Australia over the phone and in TAB retail outlets. Sportsbet is understandably urging the Government to address this matter urgently and we can fully understand why.

Betfair, has joined Sportsbet in the push for the removal of the restrictions around online in-play, stating, “Further, Australian consumers of these services would be afforded enhanced consumer protection, tax revenues would remain in Australia and can be used to fund problem gambling programs and research projects and Australian operators will be able to compete with offshore gambling operators on an even playing field.”

“One key reason that the IGA is presently ineffective is that it failed to regulate services, and instead focused on the methods by which those services are delivered (e.g. telephone, internet) and therefore became antiquated on a rapid basis.”

Tabcorp commented on the matters at hand adding, “online gambling must be deregulated so Australian’s are not forced to bet with offshore operators.“This will also enable domestic operators to compete on a level playing field where player protection standards can be assured.”

Online gaming has remained profitable since the outset and is only getting bigger as more tycoons get involved

After years of constant returns, online gaming sites are still growing in popularity and profitability. It is true that the massive explosion in online gaming is over but the industry is still on the way up which is amazing considering the tough economic times being experienced around the world at the moment. Studies have shown that online gambling is still considered to be a new form of business and therefore up and coming business men and women, dreaming of becoming online gambling tycoons are still striving to start their own online casinos. They have watched the growth of the sector over the last 15 years and they want to grab themselves a share of the profits.

This news comes in spite of the fact or perhaps because of the fact that online gambling is illegal in so many countries. The issue is incredibly controversial, especially in the United States which was once the biggest market in the world for online casino gaming. The recent Black Friday scandal has more than kept the issue on the agenda, the fallout has pretty much ensured that lobbyists are on the verge of having new legislation passed in Congress.

While online gaming remains banned in the USA other European markets are opening up to online gaming. Denmark is on the verge of granting new casino licenses and in a major change to their previous policies, France completely changed the way that they deal with online gaming and instituted new regulation that has seen the government essentially partner up with online casinos for a chunk of the revenue on offer. The world of online gaming is constantly changing but consistently profitable.

Most of the general public thinks that when we go on the internet and give personal information to the organization we are logged into it is considered secure for the most art. Every once in awhile there are breaches in the firewalls and the consumer is subject to a dissemination of their personal information. Such events cause great upset for the companies that have been hacked and those firms usually take steps to mitigate the damage.
When the perpetrators are apprehended and charged the sentences if they are found guilty are for the most part severe enough to deter the activity by others.

A recent story surfaced about personal information that was stolen from FoxyBingo.com players and sold and the cry for a more severe sentence came out load and clear. The UK’s Data Protection Act was contravened three times by Marc Ben-Ezra who appeared in Hendon Magistrates Court in London where he was found guilty. He was handed a three-year conditional discharge and ordered to pay FoxyBingo’s data controller Cashcade Limited £1,700 plus £830 in legal and court costs. The Information Commissioner’s Office estimated that Ben-Ezra profited approximately £25k from his dealings.
Christopher Graham of the Information Commissioner’s Office said the sentence proved only that “we still don’t have a punishment that fits the crime.”

Ben-Ezra says he bought the data from a third party while working in Israel. Ben Ezra says the practice of data theft was widespread in Israel. Cashcade Limited maintains that customer accounts were not compromised by the thief. Ben-Ezra used the name Matthew Edwards to solicit buyers for his ill gotten data. He sent emails to contacts in the UK. including a sample data set of some 400 FoxyBingo players.
Cashcade found out about the scam and set up a sting that captured Ben-Ezra after he sent the operators a 65,000-player information package for £1,700. According to Cashcade there was no banking information included in any of the data Ben-Ezra sold.

Sometimes elections produce murky or contradictory results, but not last Tuesday’s in Maine. Voters were clear and decisive in providing instructions for the Legislature, which convenes in January. We’ll soon see if lawmakers were listening attentively.

Much of the energy was focused on Question 1, the people’s veto that repealed the Legislature’s attempt to end Election Day voter registration, a practice begun as an uncontroversial “good government” measure 38 years earlier.

Because the law was supported only by Republicans, and opposed by every Democratic lawmaker, the campaign began on a partisan note, but as the returns demonstrated, by an overwhelming 60 to 40percent margin, Mainers resented the attempt to roll back voting rights. Returns were remarkably consistent, with traditionally Republican Knox County registering the broadest support for repeal.

Like the rejection of restrictions on public employee unions in Ohio and the unprecedented recall of the Arizona Senate president who led an anti-immigration campaign, Maine’s vote rejected overreaching by majority Republicans. After their sweeping victory in 2010, it’s understandable the GOP would want to reverse some current policies, but targeting a longstanding election practice that encouraged voting was peculiar. It may even have boosted turnout this time – more than 40 percent, above average for an off- off-year election, particularly one with only four questions on the statewide ballot.

GOP talk that it may now take up a carryover bill to require all voters to show photo ID is sheer silliness. The reason the bill, LD 199, was carried over is that, while it narrowly passed the House, the Senate balked. Three GOP senators who voted for ending Election Day registration – Roger Katz, Richard Rosen and David Trahan – opposed the more onerous photo ID requirement, and the Question 1 results are unlikely to make them change their minds.

Voters also turned decisively against gambling with the other two referendum questions. There was a huge margin against a Lewiston casino that was a relatively late entry, but a combined plan for slot-machine “racinos” in Biddeford and Calais also failed decisively. Given the approval of an Oxford casino in 2010, the results are a bit of a surprise, but Gov. Paul LePage may have caught the public mood when he predicted there wasn’t enough gambling business to support three new operations. A Lewiston casino would have been a significant threat to Oxford, which is expected to open next year.

New betting operations weren’t particularly popular even in home towns. Lewiston offered only 56 percent support for its own casino, and while Biddeford was slightly more favorable, the 60 percent margin there was lower than a previous municipal vote favoring relocation of the Scarborough Downs track. Only in Calais, 4-1 in favor, and surrounding Washington County, by 2-1, showed any real enthusiasm.

One significant gambling expansion did pass muster in Bangor, site of the racino that brought big-time gambling to Maine. As in 2003, when the racino question snuck through while an Indian tribal casino was being shellacked, Bangor’s racino effectively became a casino through a little-noticed bill, LD 1418, passed in June by the Legislature.

Expanded gambling at Hollywood Slots was not particularly controversial, passing the House 83-61 and the Senate, 21-12. Nor was it partisan. The 12 Senate “no” votes were divided equally between Republicans and Democrats. Still, given that every other gambling proposal has had to run the referendum gauntlet, it seems odd lawmakers gave the green light to a Bangor casino. The required local referendum passed easily on Tuesday, to no one’s surprise; Bangor’s take from Hollywood Slots is now being invested in a replacement for the aging Bangor Auditorium.

The bill’s rationale was that it would put Bangor on a par with Oxford, whose referendum passed by just 4,000 votes after an almost identical measure was rejected in 2008. But that’s just the problem. Gambling in Maine now rides the shifting currents of referendum elections, and it’s high time the Legislature came up with a better scheme.

There will be an opportunity to do that in 2012. The decisive defeats of Questions 2 and 3 should deter any other gambling supporters from gathering signatures. In both 2010 and 2011, any legislative plan would have been on the ballot as a competing measure. This may be the last, best chance to create a relatively rational statewide system.

Finally, voters narrowly approved Question 4, a constitutional amendment, really a housekeeping measure, conforming Maine to a U.S. District Court ruling moving up congressional redistricting by two years. Amendment votes are often close, for unknown reasons. Perhaps, having been so decisive elsewhere, voters want to preserve some mystery concerning their intentions for 2012.

THE banks and the credit card company Visa have warned the federal government that any attempt to use the payments system to clamp down on internet gambling would be unworkable.

They are worried that trying to block payments made to internet gambling websites could also interfere with online shopping.

The chief executive of the Australian Bankers' Association, Steven Munchenberg, warned the joint select committee on gambling reform that trying to restrict transactions was ''not straightforward''.

The committee is investigating a bill introduced by the independent Senator Nick Xenophon to restrict financial transactions on prohibited internet gambling sites.

''[If] Australia was identified as a jurisdiction where payment obligations may not be fulfilled in a certain and timely manner, it is possible that merchants and online service providers will refuse to accept business and payments from customers designated as originating from Australia,'' Mr Munchenberg said.

''This would have a significant impact on the contestability of Australian businesses as well as the ability for Australian consumers to purchase online goods and services.''

Visa also told the committee the technology was unworkable.

The federal government is already in turmoil over its plans to tackle problem gambling by introducing mandatory pre-commitment technology on poker machines. The technology, which is bitterly opposed by the clubs and hotels lobby, would ask people to nominate how much money they were prepared to bet before they started gambling.

Internet and interactive gambling is growing quickly in Australia and around the world.

The committee heard Australians could reach 92 per cent of the 2,443 online gambling sites even though the Interactive Gambling Act banned internet gambling sites from accepting money from Australian residents.

Despite the restrictions, it is estimated Australians spent more than $968 million last year on illegal online casino, poker and bingo sites.

The government promised the independent MP Andrew Wilkie it would introduce legislation requiring the technology on gaming machines by the end of May. Mr Wilkie is the chairman of the gambling reform committee.

The committee will release a report on internet gambling at the end of the month.

A member of the federal government's advisory council on gambling, Alex Blaszczynski, told the committee the legislation needed to be updated.

''Australians can easily access offshore internet gambling sites … and … have little recourse if they lose their money or experience unscrupulous treatment,'' Professor Blaszczynski wrote in his submission.

Although Conrad Murray was convicted of manslaughter, the doctor claims he was only trying to "tip" Michael Jackson into sleep when he gave him, what he says was a "tiny bit" of Propofol on the morning of his death.

During the MSNBC documentary Michael Jackson and the Doctor: A Fatal Relationship, Murray says he eventually caved to Jackson's continual begging for Propofol, which Jackson referred to as "milk."

Murray says, "[I thought] if I give him just a tiny amount of Propofol – 25 milligrams, slowly infused, I may just tip him into sleep – and the other medications will now get a chance to work because he had a fair amount of medication on board."

The trouble was, Murray had administered Jackson with other sedatives including Valium, Lorazepam, Midazolam and he claims that it was the other drugs that "overwhelmed" Michael. At this point, does it matter which drug "overwhelmed" Michael, since Murray administered them all?

In the beginning, D.C. officials created an Internet gambling law and they thought it was good.
Now, not so much.

Having passed the midway point of the eight ward-by-ward public discussions of the nefarious 2010 online gambling law, residents continue to air officials’ and the law’s dirty laundry
and that is the only good thing.

Remember, the D.C. Council in December passed the Lottery Modernization Amendment Act of 2010 and Congress blessed it.

But only now are residents being given the opportunity to grill lottery director Buddy Roogow and D.C. Internet gambling “godfather” and council member Michael A. Brown, at-large independent.

An up-to-date primer of taxpayers’ concerns from Thursday night: ANC Commissioner Andy Litsky in Ward 6 said the absence of a lottery board means Mr. Roogow, as “the gambling czar,” could become sole arbiter of who can and who cannot gamble and whether and where gambling sites will be located.

Mr. Litsky’s concerns are legitimate because it was Mr. Roogow who told the New York Times in August that gamblers “can do it from Starbucks, a restaurant, bar or hotel, or from a private residence.”

Marie Drissel, proprietor of the stopdcgambling.com blogspot, urged officials to do something they have yet to do in their frantic push to implement the first-in-the-nation Internet gambling law: offer a live public demonstration. (The next meeting is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, at the MLK Library.)

Ann Loikow, a civic activist and principled D.C. statehood advocate, questioned several aspects of D.C. online gambling, including possible conflicts with federal laws and regulations, the lack of fully vetted D.C. regulations and the fact that lottery officials would police themselves because there is no lottery oversight board.

Ms. Loikow also rightly pointed out that city officials broke the seal of public trust when they “rushed through” the law in the final budget bill of 2010.

Supporters, meanwhile, eye the potential gambling dollar signs to support education, housing and social services.

Mr. Brown, chief cook and bottle washer of the D.C. law who attends the meetings and addresses the legal and policy aspects of the law, told the people at Thursday night’s session that revenue generated by online gambling could provide affordable housing for 85 D.C. families.

That’s nice to know. But another fact overrides that statistic: The gambling revenue would be deposited into the city’s general fund coffers where, like crabs in a barrel, agency chiefs crawl all over themselves for public dollars.

Of course, at this juncture, now that the law is on the books, the issue isn’t how potential gambling dollars will be spent but how Internet gambling will be regulated and implemented.

Indeed, Mr. Roogow voluntarily attempted to answer a scenario I laid out in my Oct. 16 column: several people in one home all logged on to gamble on separate computers at the same time. But Mr. Roogow painted the wrong the picture: one that suggests “collusion” of residential gamblers instead of one that suggests inclusion of law-abiding gamblers.

Council members Jack Evans of Ward 2, Tommy Wells of Ward 6 and Marion Barry of Ward 8 are next in line to host the final public sessions. I urge all three to invite members of the faith community so they can express the moral pros and cons of gambling.

Residents also told me they want to encourage Mr. Wells, who wants to repeal the Internet gambling law, to articulate, as a lawmaker, why this law fails to pass public and legal muster.

In other words, exposing closeted supporters’ motives could go a long way toward regaining the public’s trust of city hall.

EU regulators have given the go-ahead for Denmark to implement a lower tax rate for online gambling operators than for land-based operators.

The decision comes following an investigation that was undertaken in response to complaints from the land-based gambling industry that Danish online gambling taxes constitutes aid from the state.

Denmark is one of the highest taxing countries in the EU. They suggested a 20 percent flat tax rate on all gross revenue from online gambling operators. This is compared to the hefty 75 percent tax rate that is applied to land-based gambling operators.

The land-based gambling industry has complained about the discrepancy in tax rates for the two industries. Effectively, this decision has freed all EU member states to require a lower tax rate for online operators than for land-based operators.

The statement issued by the European Commission following its investigation stated that the investigation found a law that removes many restrictions connected to online gambling in Denmark and that the lower Danish online gambling taxes compared to land-based operators is in compliance with rules set out by the EU.

The statement continued that the laws in Denmark are compatible with the EU laws due to the many advantages that are realised through the liberalisation of the online gambling market.

Online Gambling Operators Seek Danish Licenses

The new online gambling laws in Denmark allow online operators to offer casino games, real money poker, sports betting and bingo. Online gambling operators have been praising the steps taken by Denmark and it is likely that other EU member states will follow in their footsteps. A number of online sportsbooks and casinos will now begin the process of applying for a Danish license. Betfair has indicated that they supported the EU decision and would be seeking a Danish gaming license. Betfair also commented that the decision by the EU regulators indicates how European gambling should operate and what legislation should be like.

The benefits of the Danish legislation will be will be available for Danish operators, as well as international ones. Benefits include transparent and competitive gaming in a safe and secure environment.

European Lotteries on the other hand came out strongly against the decision, arguing that the continued liberalisation of the online gambling industry would result in an increase in problem gambling. It argued that taxation for online operators and land-based operators should be equal. The European Lotteries do not benefit from the new legislation.

Donald Trump sees money — lots of it — flowing away from him. That, he said, needs to change.

The real estate mogul and founder of an Atlantic City casino company says the United States should legalize Internet gambling. The company that bears his name, Trump Entertainment Resorts, is moving forward with plans to establish an online betting venture as soon as it's legal.

The company says it wants to get in on the ground floor of the Internet gambling business, and is close to selecting a joint venture partner to run an online gambling operation. The idea is to be well-placed and ready to go as soon as such activity is legalized in the United States.

"It should be approved here," Trump told The Associated Press on Thursday. "An awful lot of money is leaving the U.S. that should and could stay in this country."

Trump Entertainment, which includes Donald Trump and daughter, Ivanka, and the Avenue Capital hedge fund, would own 10 percent of the new venture.

Donald Trump said the key to success in the online gambling market is having the best brand.

"We think we have the hottest brand there is, the Trump brand, my personal brand," he said. "We think it's going to do phenomenally well."

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Trump Entertainment said it has "determined that such a joint venture represents the most advantageous way for the company to participate in opportunities in online gaming at minimal cost to the company."

No cost estimates were given, and Robert Griffin, the company's CEO, declined to comment Thursday. But in March, after Gov. Chris Christie vetoed a bill passed by New Jersey lawmakers that would have allowed Internet betting solely within New Jersey's borders, Griffin said the money lost to offshore operators should benefit New Jersey.

The law would have made New Jersey the first state in the nation to allow Internet betting.

"Currently, millions of Americans engage in online gaming with illegal offshore operators, and do so with no oversight, no regulation or no consumer protections," Griffin said at the time. "It makes sense for the state of New Jersey to regulate this activity, enforce strict standards to ensure games are fair and safe, and in turn be able to collect tax revenue instead of having those dollars and the jobs they support leaving New Jersey and going illegally overseas."

Christie said he vetoed the law fearing it was unconstitutional and could lead to an explosion of betting parlors throughout the state. By law, gambling in New Jersey is restricted to Atlantic City.

But a New Jersey lawmaker is asserting that individual states have the legal right to offer in-state Internet gambling within their own borders.

State Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Union, wrote in July to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder asserting that New Jersey and all other states can legally offer online betting within their borders.

Lesniak said he will introduce legislation in November to address the main concerns expressed by Christie.

The filing said the company, Donald and Ivanka Trump, and Avenue Capital have signed an agreement authorizing the joint venture once it becomes legal, and that prohibits any of them from seeking other online gambling ventures through May 2012.

Atlantic City is in the midst of a nearly five-year revenue slump brought on by increasing competition from casinos in neighboring states, and worsened by the continuing unsteady economy.