Online poker hearing reveals little tension over proposed regulations

VEGAS INC archives

More gaming stories

If the process for approving online poker regulations goes as smoothly as Monday's workshop explaining the proposed rules, Nevada will have a document in place in no time.

The state Gaming Control Board spent just an hour and 15 minutes fielding questions and taking testimony on a proposed new iGaming regulation and amendments to five other regulations that would pave the way for the state to become the first in the nation to have rules in place to oversee Internet poker as soon as the federal government legalizes it.

No controversy arose from the packed hearing room filled with industry attorneys, former regulators, representatives of companies that intend to have a role in online poker play and several players.

Proposed Regulation 5A on the operation of interactive gaming outlines licensing, internal controls, record-keeping, player registration, fees, dispute resolution and the reporting of suspicious wagers.

The state's new law and the regulations clearly require that the state not grant any licenses until federal law authorizes interactive gaming or the board or commission is notified by the U.S. Department of Justice that it is permissible under federal law to operate interactive games.

Some of the highlights of Regulation 5A:

• All interactive gaming systems must be reviewed and approved by the Nevada Gaming Commission.

• Ongoing testing of interactive systems, including oversight to protect a player's identity and account information is required.

• To register a player, an operator must verify the identity of the individual, affirm that the player is at least 21, capture the location of the player and ascertain the player isn't in the state's "Black Book" of excluded casino patrons.

• Records of all financial transactions, wins and losses, must be kept and players can't be extended credit.

• Poker is the only game incorporated into the regulations.

• Operators must report suspicious wagers within seven days.

• Interactive gaming licenses are separate from existing gaming licenses, so prospective licensees will be required to pay fees for iGaming licenses.

The state legislation authorizing interactive gaming sets the licensing fees at $500,000, with $250,000 annual renewals and $125,000 for service providers with $25,000 annual renewals.

The state law also mandates by when regulations must be approved, with a Jan. 31 deadline. Under the Control Board's timetable, the board and the Nevada Gaming Commission are expected to conduct public hearings at their November meetings with the commission expected to take final action at its December meeting.

Board members also reviewed amendments to five other regulations that have passages that related to interactive gaming systems. Regulations 3, 4, 5, 8 and 14 have such passages.

Because there were so few comments at Monday's session, Control Board Chairman Mark Lipparelli indicated an additional workshop meeting scheduled in October may not be needed.

"I think we're fairly close," Lipparelli said after the meeting. "I think we have a solid foundation, but there may be changes based on written comments that were submitted."

He said about 12 submissions were presented. Representatives of some of the companies that presented written testimony indicated they preferred to keep their comments confidential to protect business strategies.

During the meeting testimony, the only hint of controversy came when an interactive gaming expert, attorney Tony Cabot, sought clarification on whether the state believed the federal government ban on online poker included intranet as well as Internet play. He suggested that both should be restricted the same way so that some companies could not get a competitive advantage.

But former state Gaming Control Board member Randall Sayre said he believed the legislation approved by lawmakers doesn't address in-state intranet play.

Another speaker, RedRockOne CEO Michael Jabara, encouraged the board to adopt the regulations as quickly as possible so that Nevada could maintain a competitive advantage against other states that may be considering the regulation of online gaming.

Gaming

Share