Search Engines Break AU Online Gambling Ban? 196
An anonymous reader writes "According to a ZDNet report, authorities in Australia are investigating Google and a few other search engines for possible breach of the country's online gambling laws. The Interactive Gambling Act 2001 prohibits advertising of gambling services on Web sites where 'it is likely that the majority of that site's users are physically present in Australia'. Banned services include online casino-style gaming services such as roulette, poker, craps, online poker machines and blackjack. Breaching the Act carries a maximum penalty of AU$220,000 ($168,000) per day for individuals and AU$1.1 million ($843,000) per day for corporations."
They want whats best for problem gamblers. (Score:3, Interesting)
Anybody remember the day... (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe it's time to start looking into that again.
Re:Simple. (Score:3, Interesting)
Not all countries have freedom of speech. I don't know what Austrailia's stand on this is, but it's a tad parochial to assume that the US Bill of Rights holds everywhere.
Americans don't have freedom of speech because of the first ammendment, Americans have the first ammendment because of freedom of speech. The Bill of Rights enumerates a number of the basic freedoms that apply to all people everywhere; they cannot be legislated away just because a particular government or ruler doesn't like them.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
WTO Precedence (Score:2, Interesting)
The Caribbean country views the WTO ruling as a victory. It sees two options for the United States. The first is that the United States must ban all gambling. The second option would be to grant offshore companies access to the market. The Justice Department did not return calls for comment."
So, it's interesting that the Australian government is taking a stance against Google and online gambling, considering that they are part of the WTO as well. I imagine that this will only leave them open to a suit by the small countries to force them to open their borders up to online gambling.
Then again, the WTO ruling hasn't had much effect on the States, where online gambling is still in pretty murky areas. On the other hand, one look at Google for searches such as poker or online poker and you'll find ad-sense placements filled to the brim. I think until someone actually slaps the search engines on the wrist and sets clear precedence, they will continue to see it as a (lucrative) revenue stream.
Re:This just in... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't plan on doing anything with them at all. It's their life and you can't have freedom without responsibility. Your response is a perfect example of that.
When people gamble away their rent money they need to learn not to gamble away their rent money.
I'm fine with an extremly basic social safety net, but if a thing isn't physically addictive I don't see the justification to regulate it. People spend lots of money on lots of things that I consider stupid. Some folks go into debt to buy expensive cars which they don't have the cash to pay for and will just depreciate. What happens if they lose their job?
My point is, how do you define 'gambling' to separate it from other bad risks people take? If insurance is a bad risk, should it be illegal? Is anything that involves some skill not considered gambling? Isn't analyzing point spreads on football games, for instance, partially a matter of skill?
And hell, Australia has a government run lottery. If gambling is bad, so it's kindof talking out of both sides of its mouth.