| 08/01/2010 |
Online Casino Style: News |
|
|
|
A happy and surprising ruling has been filed in relation to a poker court case in the Netherlands this week, giving the online gambling community cause to celebrate. A Dutch court managed to find in favor of the game of poker, determining that the game is indeed a game of skill and not of chance, bolstering pro-internet casino interests with the decision. The most surprising element to the development may well be the fact that just a few weeks ago, another courtroom had found exactly the opposite, ruling instead that poker was a game of chance! Considering how tightly monitored and controlled the Dutch online gambling market already is, still under the power of a state-owned monopoly, the implications are going to be confusing at best. The monopoly has enjoyed their share of success in the court room, consistently backed by the law for the exclusive rights to the industry, despite the EU trade laws. With the most recent decision that poker is skill and not chance, that monopoly could well be threatened. The state has already confirmed their intent to appeal the ruling. The original case was against an individual, professional poker player Stefan van Zadelhoff, who was arrested for his involvement in organizing live poker tournaments, supposedly against the law. His team’s defense has been based upon proving that the game is one of skill, and therefore does not constitute gambling, an argument being had all over the world, with regularly contradictory results. If Zadelhoff is found right, it could potentially made poker a free game in the Netherlands, powerfully upsetting the existing structure. The Holland Casino holds the monopoly for the region, for both land-based and internet casinos. In spite of legal restrictions, its been estimated that as many as half a million Dutch residents continue to visit offshore online gambling sites, generating a respectable €450 million in revenues. |
|---|
| Copyright © 2008 Online Casino Style Quick links for news ♦ Jan 2008 ♦ Oct 2008 ♦ Nov 2008 ♦ Dec 2008 ♦ Jan 2009 ♦ Jan 2010 ♦ Feb 2010 ♦ Mar 2010 ♦ Apr 2010 ♦ May 2010 ♦ June 2010 ♦ July 2010 ♦ |