Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleOnline gambling is illegal, but betting sites’ logos often in Nevada casinos
Many poker players such as Mike Beasley, shown at a July 7 World Series of Poker event, sport logos of Internet gaming sites.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 | 2 a.m.
Related Document (.pdf)
.Net versus .com
Gambling companies’ free-play tutorial websites ending in “.net” have historically gotten a pass with regulators. But now regulators see little difference between .com and .net sites.Casino partnerships
Local casino companies have even entered into sponsorship deals with online gambling sites. But because of the U.S. government’s position that online gambling is illegal, the Nevada Gaming Control Board is taking a close look at the deals.
Mike "The Mouth" Matusow, wearing a Full Tilt Poker.net logo, celebrates a winning hand July 5 at the World Series of Poker.
Sun Coverage
Black-market online gambling companies have a considerable presence on the stage that is Las Vegas.
Those who watched the start of the World Series of Poker main event at the Rio this month were just as likely to see logos for online gambling companies as they were to see the tournament’s ubiquitous poker chip icon.
Internet casinos pay tournament winners, celebrity players and other high-profile gamblers to wear their logos, and wannabes wind up wearing a lot of the same logos.
Despite the federal government’s long-standing position that online gambling is illegal, such brand advertising has moved into the mainstream, with logos appearing on the shorts of mixed martial arts fighters, the green felt of gaming tables and advertising banners adorning Las Vegas casinos.
Lately, some area casinos have entered into sponsorship deals with online gambling sites and the celebrity poker players hired to promote them.
Now, the Nevada Gaming Control Board is taking a closer look at many of those arrangements.
One primary target of the Control Board’s recent attention is the Venetian, which hosted a traveling poker tournament in February sponsored by PokerStars.net.
Years ago, gambling companies created separate, free-play tutorial websites ending in “.net” — thinking they would be protected from federal government prosecution. American broadcasters and Nevada gaming regulators have historically accepted this form of advertising because these Web portals don’t offer real-money gambling. And yet, while ads for these .net Internet poker sites continue to be broadcast on American TV, the Control Board, upon further investigation of such sites, has more recently concluded that there’s little difference between .com and .net sites because they are owned by some of the same corporate entities and individuals.
Control Board member Randall Sayre takes a dim view of .net sites.
“We are concerned that Nevada licensees are associating with companies that are ... purposefully violating the law,” by continuing to accept wagers from Americans even as they advertise .net sites in this country, Sayre says.
Whether a casino company is violating state law by affiliating with a .net site would depend on how the relationship is structured, he adds.
Sayre clarified the Control Board’s position on Internet gambling relationships in May when he responded to a query from a casino company (which the board will not name) and distributed his written response to the Nevada casino industry.
The Venetian then dissolved its sponsorship arrangement with PokerStars and its North American Poker Tour.
“We don’t have any current relationships with any of the online companies. Obviously, we’re going to follow” the Control Board’s lead, Venetian spokesman Ron Reese says.
Sayre won’t comment on the Venetian deal or discuss any other specific casinos and their advertising or marketing arrangements, though he said some casinos are in the process of dismantling or changing contract terms.
His letter urges the industry to be cautious. The Justice Department “has shown no indication of relaxing its position and interpretation that Internet gambling in any form is illegal in the United States,” the letter notes.
The ubiquity of online gambling brands in Las Vegas remains a murky subject, in part because of the Control Board’s unwillingness to comment on specific casinos or deals that cross the line in favor of pursuing private discussions with casino companies. The May letter notes that the board is “assessing these relationships on a case-by-case basis ...”
The federal government has taken the lead on Internet gambling by charging online gambling operators with money laundering and mail fraud, among other infractions. Internet gambling is, after all, an interstate, even global, enterprise. Nevada regulators, lacking the resources, jurisdiction or will to prosecute offshore gambling companies — have taken a backseat role. Still, the Control Board has a requirement to ensure that Nevada casinos aren’t doing business with illegal entities, Sayre says.
Nevada’s two largest casino companies, Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Resorts International, have been careful in recent years not to enter into direct deals with Internet gambling companies that accept bets from Americans, even as they urge lawmakers to legalize Internet gambling so they can capitalize on demand and diversify their bricks-and-mortar casino empires.
Since December, Harrah’s has launched three British gambling websites that claim to block bets from American citizens.
Some MGM Resorts casinos have hosted the World Poker Tour, a traveling tournament sponsored by PartyPoker.com. PartyPoker was the largest poker gambling site in the country until 2006, when the company got out of the U.S. market in deference to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which further criminalized online gambling by making it illegal for banks to process online gambling transactions.
After the bill passed Congress, some sites left the U.S. market, fearing prosecution by federal regulators. Some sites, including PokerStars.com and Full Tilt Poker.com — whose .net logos adorn the clothing of many World Series of Poker players — continue to allow action from Americans, however. Those sites are “purposefully putting that product in the United States in disregard of Department of Justice interpretations of federal law and also Nevada law,” Sayre says.
With a few exceptions, such as horse racing and sports betting for Nevada residents who set up accounts in person and use registered software, Internet gambling is illegal in Nevada, which states that the federal government must explicitly OK online gambling before the state can allow it.
Harrah’s and its World Series of Poker tournament have been “overly cautious” in avoiding deals with Internet gambling companies doing business in the United States, tournament spokesman Seth Palansky says. Since at least 2006, the tournament has prevented such companies from putting up banners, setting up booths to entertain players or selling merchandise at the Rio. However, the tournament allows hospitality suites to be branded by the names of poker pros affiliated with gambling sites, and vehicles advertising the websites sit parked outside the Rio.
One of the tournament’s sponsors is, in fact, an online gambling site called Everest Poker. That’s allowed because it is a European site that says it prevents U.S. play.
Cynics might say that bricks-and-mortar casinos are finding ways to get around the rules because online gambling companies drive revenue to casinos.
Palansky counters that “there’s no way a giant corporation ... would want to risk a successful land-based operation for what amounts to a small financial gain.” In Harrah’s case, the World Series of Poker continues to break records for attendance and prize money — but it generates a tiny fraction of Harrah’s overall revenue, he adds.
While the Control Board is examining deals involving celebrity poker players who market poker rooms or other venues for Nevada casinos, the casino companies involved say they have deals with the players themselves rather than the Internet gambling sites the players promote on the side.
These include MGM Resorts’ Aria, which has a deal with poker pro Phil Ivey to brand the property’s poker room, and Cantor Gaming, which uses poker legend Doyle Brunson to market the company’s mobile gambling device for use at the M Resort.
Ivey is among a team of celebrity players who promote Full Tilt Poker.com while Brunson represents the gambling site doylesroom.com.
Sayre said regulators are most concerned with a direct exchange of money between Internet gambling companies and Nevada casinos that are using those companies to promote gambling activities.
“Are you merely making a provision for a guest or are you engaged in a commercial joint venture where there’s oversight responsibility or a sharing of revenue? This became an activity that migrated further than logos on baseball caps, felts on the table or monikers on a shirt.”
Mindful of such concerns, some casinos are finding creative ways of working with Internet gambling brands.
The PokerStars.net logo, for example, is adorning table felts and banner ads at the Palms, where PokerStars officials and customers — players who won entry to the World Series of Poker by playing satellite tournaments on the website — are staying during the tournament.
Palms spokesman Larry Fink said the property doesn’t have a sponsorship or other official marketing deal with PokerStars, and that the arrangement is similar to free advertising given to many other groups who have stayed at the resort in the past.
The Palms has notified the Control Board of the arrangement, which is more than a year old, Fink says.
The Control Board’s concern about business deals doesn’t extend to what players wear during tournaments and other poker games, however. That strays into the First Amendment rights of those players, Sayre says.
Las Vegas casino attorney and Internet gambling expert Tony Cabot says the board is right about that. It can’t dictate what casino customers can or can’t wear, he says.
People paid to wear logos or who choose to wear them are “simply patrons of the casino who are buying into the tournament” and aren’t subject to laws governing how casinos can operate, Cabot says.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Coolican: Henderson officials out of loop on police brutality case, raising red flags
- Lumberjacks — ‘Where the Big Boys Eat’ — hiring for North Las Vegas location
- Berkley draws stark contrasts with Heller over immigration
- Howard Miller, prominent lawyer and ‘true Las Vegas native,’ dies at 68
- Two dead after accident in downtown Las Vegas
- Instant Analysis: Debating whether UNLV should continue series with San Diego State
- Short memories may serve president
- Superstar Whitney Houston dies at 48
- Police looking for man in white Ford Explorer
- Saying ‘No mas’ to government
Blogs
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Advertising of Online Gaming Sites can e found everywhere. They sponsor most poker magazines, plus, they're on TV as well. But here's the biggest irony ever: They officially advertise "Free Gambling Websites". In fact, they say..."this is not a gambling website" "Play with us, learn from the pros, for free". But if it's free , why would they make it, an idiot would ask himself, right?
This is another way to avoid legal actions and still advertise something that's officially illegal. Just like the idea of advertising tobacco companies in front of schools with chewing gum Marlboro cigarettes and the note "this ain't real cigarettes, this is only for fun".
The industry knows how much money is to be made. The casinos fear competition and tried to get it out of their way. The only way to advertise online gaming to new customers is to approach players directly. This can only be done at places where players meet, such as casinos, or things that players read, that's magazines. And that's where online sites present themselves. On those countless tv shows , sponsored by PokerStars and the others, there you can only find free online gaming ads, but please tell me: If it would be free, why would they advertise it? Do they think the world is stupid? Obviously the lawmakers are stupid to play this ball game.
From Switzerland
There are going to be BIG RAIDS coming soon. Mark my words.
Boomer111, funky, Alabama
I just think this is one of a multitude of bad bets made by Las Vegas. Instead of embracing online gambling, they opposed it, just as they did with Indian Casinos (although there is a great vegas influence for management of those casinos). Hey, but thats the worldwide web, in earlier days, I would not have the opportunity to read a Las Vegas newspaper on a daily basis, let alone make a comment on the article. Back in the day, Vegas was a 4 times a year experience, cheap rooms, cheap food, option to play at lower stakes, etc. Today, albeit getting more to my kind of town (so to speak), it still reminds me that I am not the type of gambler they want hanging around. I love going to Vegas, but I do have a limit of around $300 a day in losses. That still isn't good enough for most casinos. Thats a 3 or 4 day weekend mind you. So if I lose everyday, pay for my room, pay for a $5 Big Mac and another $3 for a coke to wash it down. Thats like $2000 down the drain, it almost equates to a house payment, unless of course, you live in Las Vegas. I can't call it, but Las Vegas can change for a guy like me, or I could stay at home, bbq my own steak and lobster for around $15, and play $5 hands of blackjack at 3/2 odds all night and enjoy.
Online gambling is not the wave of the future it's already HERE! and it's going nowhere unless somehow the authorities figure out how to control it, but to do that they would have to find a way to manipulate the internet, even then someone would find a way around it. It's like water finding it's way.
The AG says online poker is illegal, but has never prosecuted anyone. Why? Could it be they are afraid they cannot get a conviction and would set a precedent?
In the 1970's, they lowered the speed limit to 55. No one paid any attention. They installed CBs and drove 70. A law that most disregard is a bad law. Prohibition does not work.
Millions play poker every day, legal or not. What I do in my home is MY business, not that of the government. It's MY money.
gmafromla, Old Las Vegas is not coming back. 48 of 50 states has some form of legal gambling. Everyone in the US is within a days drive of a casino. Casinos in LV make more $$ on rooms/food/entertainment than they do on gambling. The business model is different now. Those who continue to lament the old days and not understand that times changed and the city has too are wasting their time and energy. They aren't being greedy in this case, but surviving. See: Atlantic City.
Anyone will to bet against a computer chip is too dumb to argue with. Duh!
Not one dime from me
@Martin9,
The article is probably referring to NRS 466.091-095, which makes it a misdemeanor to use the internet to communicate wagers in or out of the state. Both the person sending and the person receiving are guilty under the statute. Also, NRS 463.3557 mirrors the federal law making it illegal to fund a game with a credit card. (Although, also just like the federal law, nothing is mentioned about e-checks).
I couldn't find any law on the books making it illegal without the federal government's say-so. That would be out of character for Nevada.
Ah, so that's what an a**hat looks like.
The reason why online poker rooms are not legal, is because casinos have lobbyists in Washington greasing the palms of policy makers, that will make sure, such laws will never pass, aka... not good for casino revenue... daaaaa......
Randy Sayre loves to hear the sound of his own voice. He needs to justify his position so he finds things like this to crusade against. He hurts the casino industry more than he will ever help it. Thank goodness his term will be over soon. Good riddance
The tone of this article and the caliber of responses explain why Nevada has fallen from first to worst so fast. If you can't defend Joe Six Pack and his desire to play online poker in his own home, what can you defend?
Enjoy your unemployment and fingerwagging tirades against anyone anywhere who might be enjoying themselves. Like LeBron, Poker is free to move to Miami too.
Keep talking to Casino Attorneys, Gaming Control Boards, Randall Sayre, carry water for as many flim-flam bureaucrats as you can.
I see an unpaid blogging gig in your future Liz Benston, there's plenty of Nanny Sycophants on the net to keep you company there.
Wow, maybe someone should actually attend an event or go into a poker room before writing such a fluff piece.
The poker sites have agreed to keep the dot net sites free from "real" gaming and play for Free and are used for amusement. The dot com sites are were the money is exchanged and the federal ban is in place for.
So, by WSOP rules and that of most Poker rooms, all logo wear is for the Dot Net sites. the free sites. Go in wearing a dot com logo and you will be removed.
Hey, Boris,
was missing you at the spa yesterday in the morning at 10 o'clock...;-)
Maybe actually its2hot for you, isn't it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryRgOU76V...
Regards
Banana_Joe
Well, I just don't see the problem with online casinos. It is a perfectly risk-free and is legal in many European countries. What's the big deal? I have played these casino games for years and nothing bad happened. I think the government is going too far in controlling liberty. Let's not forget that people should be able to spend their hard-earned cash however they want. It's called freedom.
By reading the reviews nowadays, it is easier now to separate the good casinos from the bad ones. So I say let us decide and keep online casino gambling where it should be -- a bit of harmless entertainment. What do you guys think?
Banana_Joe
I will be in Las Vegas on 10/10, not before that. I don't know nutting about you, but I don't even know if you live in Vegas. If you live in Vegas or come to VEgas in October, we could certainly get together and discuss more issues on online gaming or other interesting topics, such as professional videopoker, and more.
Best regards from Switzerland
Boris
Hey, Boris,
that's cool... guess to see and meet you in Vegas then in 10/10.
Looking forward to coming back to you.
Best wishes and kind regards
Banana_Joe
1. Online gambling isn't going away. Ever.
2. Government regulation would help assure fair games and raise taxable revenues but...
3. This would end up costing players in the long run.
Most people who have been around Vegas for any length of time will agree that things were better when the mob ran casinos. Keep the feds OUT of the online gaming industry. Keep gambling unregulated.