Originally Posted by punctual
In that case I would imagine every company would be considered a bad actor since (so I've heard) they all use the same Random Number Generator.
And let's be honest, this "bad actor" clause is just a way of picking and choosing the companies politicians want to enrich. I think the government shoudl not be deciding who can compete in a free market economy.....
They don't all use the same RNG. They do the same thing, but the programs themselves are unique to the companies offering games. It is the overall software package that constitutes the intellectual property; the user interface, the RNG, the branding, the graphics, etc.
The bad actors clause is really the 'keep Pokerstars
out' clause. They use a convenient date that lets Party and 888
in but Pokerstars out. I don't think anyone is fooled. I also don't think it needs to be legislated.
Using UIGEA as the red line for the bad actors clause is disingenuous, because UIGEA did not make online gambling any more or less illegal than it was before its passage. But it does separate Pokerstars from the pack.