Questionable Legal Status, Potential Target for State Legal Authorities, May Impact Sweepstakes Casinos
With the limited availability of real-money online casino gaming in seven U.S. states, sweepstakes casinos have sprung up to fill the void. These unregulated platforms, available through major app stores, offer a "sweepstakes" veneer while providing real-money casino-style gambling, including slots, roulette, and poker. Despite their questionable legality, they've seen impressive growth - boasting over one million U.S. players and projecting $11.4 billion in player purchases this year.
These platforms claim to offer a "sweepstakes-like" experience, akin to Publisher's Clearinghouse or McDonald's promotions. However, they differ in their continuous operation and focus on casino games, with no separate product promotion. The "sweepstakes" aspect is merely a smoke screen: players purchase a type of token (Gold Coins) to play for no real-world prizes, while receiving a "free" allotment of another type of currency (Sweeps Coins) to play for the chance to win real money prizes.
Despite their dubious legality, sweepstakes casinos have operated largely unchecked in the U.S. Legal challenges have mainly come through private class action lawsuits and isolated cease-and-desist notices from state regulatory agencies. However, these cases face numerous challenges, such as lengthy litigation processes, procedural hurdles, and the sweepstakes operators' frequent tendency to settle rather than risk a precedent-setting judgment.
A more effective approach to combat the proliferation of online sweepstakes casinos is through the civil enforcement powers of state attorneys general. These authorities have the ability to seek remedies like injunctions, restitution, and civil penalties to address fraudulent or illegal activity without being burdened by arbitration clauses or standing issues that can undermine private civil lawsuits. Moreover, state attorneys general can pursue second-tier actors, such as banks and payment processors, for material assistance in illegal gambling operations.
For instance, in California, the Attorney General can sue under the state's Unfair Competition Law for injunctive relief, restitution, and mandatory civil penalties. By doing so, the operators can be forced to shut down and pay massive fines to injured consumers and state treasuries. In helping to put an end to illegal gambling operations, this approach can have significant impact beyond what individual cease-and-desist orders can achieve.
However, California, Florida, and New York present unique challenges for sweepstakes casino operators. All three states have constitutionally enshrined gambling prohibitions and strict anti-gambling statutes, which include expansive aiding-and-abetting provisions that can target financial intermediaries. California and Florida, in particular, have a strong financial incentive to tackle illegal gambling due to revenue-sharing agreements under tribal gambling compacts, which could be jeopardized by unchecked online sweepstakes casinos.
In California, the Supreme Court has consistently held that consideration, linked to the chance to win real money prizes, is present in casino-style sweepstakes, and thus illegal gambling is in evidence. Additionally, numerous other factors indicate that the true purpose of these platforms is to promote gambling, such as a "casino-like" environment, perpetual duration, and high payout percentages.
The nearly 1:1 correlation between Gold Coins and Sweeps Coins purchased and received is crucial in supporting the argument that Gold Coins are merely a cover for the real purpose of the platform, which is to promote sweepstakes gambling. If the gold coins do not provide sufficient value beyond the Sweeps Coins, it reinforces the notion that the Sweeps Coins are the primary subject of the transaction, which, by association, implies that the gold coins are also.
It is encouraging to see that the favorable case law in California makes it an ideal state for challenging online sweepstakes casinos. The presence of consideration and abundant anti-gambling statutes in California create a high probability that a court would find unlawful lottery activity. By doing so, the sweepstakes operators could face multiple Penal Code violations, including those associated with specific casino-style games, slot machines, and unlicensed games of chance.
California's restrictive consumer protection laws further undermine the argument that virtual currency is a bona fide consumer good. Online sweepstakes casino operators may also face legal consequences for partnering with banks and payment processors that aid in their illegal activities. The California Attorney General, empowered by the Unfair Competition Law, can bring civil actions against these operators for permanent injunctive relief, restitution, and mandatory civil penalties.
In a nutshell, online sweepstakes casinos in the U.S. are facing mounting legal challenges, particularly through private civil lawsuits and regulatory investigations. While these platforms might have a place in the gambling landscape, their current legal grey areas and reliance on unregulated operations won't be sustainable in the long term. State attorneys general can play a significant role in bringing transparency and regulation to the sector, ultimately protecting consumers, safeguarding financial interests, and ensuring that the industry operates within the bounds of the law.
[1] Enrichment Data
Breakdown of Penal Code Provisions
- Section 320: Ban on conducting, setting up, establishing, maintaining, or assisting in the conduct of any gambling game.
- Section 330a: Ban on playing or operating banking or percentage games with cards, dice, or any other device without a written contract between the bank and the player.
- Section 330b: Ban on slot machines and banks or bill distributing devices/machines that are not licensed by the California Gambling Control Commission.
- Section 337a: It is a misdemeanor to engage or permit private gaming in any form, by wagering something of value. It is illegal to receive, hold, or forward any money staked, bet, or wagered upon the result of any contest or lot, chance, casualty, unknown, or contingent event whatsoever.
- Section 337j: It is unlawful for any person to establish, operate, or conduct any "controlled game" without a license from the California Gambling Control Commission. A controlled game is any game of chance that awards prizes based on skill or chance.
- Section 337.2: It is unlawful to utilize false, misleading, or deceptive advertising to lure gamblers to privately conducted and/or unlicensed gaming establishments.
- Section 345: Facing a felony charge for offenses related to gambling.
History of Anti-Gambling Legislation in California
Anti-gambling legislation in California has a long and contentious history, with efforts to legalize and regulate gambling dating back to the Gold Rush era. Many of the laws and statutes that govern gambling activities in California today have their roots in this era, defining what gambling is, who can operate gambling establishments, and how they can operate.
As California grew and developed, so too did the demand for gambling establishments and gaming activities. This led to ongoing legal battles, shady underground operations, and a need for increased regulation and oversight. It wasn't until the 20th century that substantial anti-gambling laws were put into place, largely in response to widespread organized crime activities and the public's growing concern for gambling addiction and its impact on communities.
One of the most significant milestones in California's anti-gambling legislative history was the passage of the Gambling Control Act of 1965. This landmark legislation established the California Gambling Control Commission to regulate gambling activities within the state. The commission has the power to issue licenses, establish and enforce regulations, and conduct investigations into suspected violations of gambling laws.
Since then, numerous amendments and modifications have been made to the California Gambling Control Act, and other relevant legislation, to address emerging trends and challenges in the gambling industry. For example, in response to the popularity of tribal casinos, which started to rise in the late 20th century, the 1987 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act gave Native American tribes the right to operate gambling facilities on their lands as long as they had a compact with the state.
Today, California's anti-gambling legislation remains an essential tool for regulating the gambling industry, ensuring responsible gaming practices, and promoting public safety.
Dispute over Online Sweepstakes Casinos and Traditional Casinos
Online sweepstakes casinos have been a source of ongoing debate, as they skirt the legal boundaries set by traditional gambling regulations. Critics argue that these platforms are essentially online casinos that attempt to evade regulations by disguising their operations as sweepstakes.
Supporters argue that these platforms are simply offering a form of gaming that is different from traditional casinos, and that they do not constitute illegal gambling. They point out that the virtual currency used in online sweepstakes casinos is not considered a "thing of value" under California's gambling laws and that they provide consumers with the option of free or real-money play.
Regardless of the stance, ongoing legal challenges will likely determine the future of online sweepstakes casinos and their place within the broader gambling landscape.
The Future of Regulated Online Gambling in the U.S.
As more states explore options for regulating and legalizing online gambling, the situation for online sweepstakes casinos becomes increasingly unclear. While it is clear that online casino-style gambling must be regulated, the precise form that regulation will take is still up for debate.
Some states, like New Jersey and Delaware, have already legalized and regulated online gambling, while others, like California, have yet to take any concrete steps. As the regulatory landscape evolves, online sweepstakes casinos could either find themselves operating in a more permissive environment or facing increased scrutiny and potential legal challenges.
Regardless of the ultimate outcome, one thing is clear: the trend towards regulated online gambling is not going away, and online sweepstakes casinos will need to adapt to this changing landscape or risk facing increased scrutiny and potential legal challenges.
- Despite the growth of sweepstakes casinos in online gaming, their legal status remains questionable, with native American tribes and state attorneys general expressing concerns about their operation.
- In California, the attorney general has the power to take legal action against sweepstakes casinos, using civil enforcement powers to seek injunctions, restitution, and civil penalties.
- The nearly 1:1 correlation between 'Gold Coins' and 'Sweeps Coins' in these platforms suggests that 'Gold Coins' are merely a cover for the real purpose of promoting 'sweepstakes gambling'.
- California's Supreme Court has consistently held that consideration is present in casino-style sweepstakes, making them illegal gambling activities under state law.
- Banks and payment processors that aid in the operation of online sweepstakes casinos may also face legal consequences, as they could be considered second-tier actors in illegal gambling operations.
- Telesweeps, an online sweepstakes casino operator, faced legal challenges in California, with the state's attorney general suing the company under the state's Unfair Competition Law.
- In adopting a more proactive approach to regulating online sweepstakes casinos, states like California can safeguard financial interests, protect consumers, and ensure that the industry operates within the bounds of the law.