[SBRPicks]

SBRtv conducted an interview with Professor I. Nelson Rose, a world-renowned authority on gambling law.

This initial interview is in three parts, and Professor Rose has agreed to do follow-up interviews to address issues of interest and questions posed by SBR posters. So if you have any question at all about the legalities of online sports betting, please post them in this thread, and we will try to address them in future interviews with Professor Rose.

In Part 2, Professor Rose discussed the current legal state of sports betting online in the U.S., and he touched on the UIGEA, the Wire Act, and laws in individual states. Look for Part 3, coming out in a few days.

Professor Rose's website is www.gamblingandthelaw.com.


I. Nelson Rose Part 2: The UIGEA, Wire Act and Current Legalities



check out PART 1 of the interview - Prof. Rose's introduction and a brief bio HERE

[Fishhead]

Thanks..........informative.

Bring on Part III

[relaaxx]

great - fantastik - can't wait for more -

[fsutomahawk]

Great stuff. So he is basically saying enforcement against players is so difficult because the standing law is so out dated and the terminology does not even apply to the current form of interstate gambling?

[Legions36]

he is saying that we are safe no matter what and the only thing that was really made hard was for us to send it to them not them sending it to us. Thanks for the clarification i feel better now as i want no extra heat in my life.

[apalm8]

Thank you I learned a lot from this.

[krk1030]

very interesting

[thespeculator]

a voice of reason on this subject , great info professor

[John Dough]

It's almost mind boggling how many offshore bettors didn't take the time to learn exactly how the UIGEA and current US law actually apply to them.

SBR should somehow force every poster to watch that clip so we don't have to see questions or misinformation posted about these subjects ever again.

Kudos to SBR and Professor Rose for bringing this information to the forefront, even though it's been around for 5 years.

[trumpdown]

So when a book says US law is making it harder to process withdraws they're most likely lying, and have no funds. As professor stated harder to deposit same as it ever was to withdraw.

[tblues2005]

It sure said a lot of things that made sense here. I think part III should be interesting also. Thanks SBR.

[John Dough]

So when a book says US law is making it harder to process withdraws they're most likely lying, and have no funds. As professor stated harder to deposit same as it ever was to withdraw.

Not necessarily. Some check processing companies in the US that serviced sportsbook payouts have had funds seized by the government over the past few years and were either put out of business or chose to stop doing business with sportsbooks. The government may not have been justified in these seizures, but good luck trying to get your money back once it has been seized.

[zam77]

The player in the US, from my understanding, is safe to place sportsbets at books, simply because there is no clear cut current law making it "illegal" for the player... only enforcement laws for operators. In addiiton the UIGEA is poorly drawn up in the first place, so basically any attempt at making a case against the player under this statute would be a waste of time for many obvious reasons.

And on top of that the fact that there are 6 states that "legally" allow sportsbetting, presumes that any development of a federal law that stated it was "illegal" for the player to make sportsbets would be unconstitutional.

Makes sense to me... good stuff loshak.

[excel]

Bump for current gambling industry crisis.

[jjgold]

Govt can do anything they like

Throw all this stuff out window.