•
This was the original title (and much better ) of the German Federal Court of Justice, after the I. Zivilsenat (first division for civil matters) at the Bundesgerichtshof (German Federal Court of Justice) dismissed in four cases action filed by state-run gambling providers (among others Westlotto) against private sports betting providers holding GDR and EU licences (among others bwin).
The press release says :
“(…) the previous instances had held that the prohibition of illegal gambling, enforced by penalties, does not violate European Community law nor German Constitutional Law. (…) The Bundesgerichtshof has not assented to this evaluation. The landmark decision by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court) dated 28 March 2006 (1 BvR 1054/01) is said to mean that the state betting monopoly in Germany, in the legal and actual form it had taken during the decisive period of time before 28 March 2006, represented a disproportionate interference with the freedom of profession of persons interested in professional activities of this kind, this therefore being inconsistent with Art. 12 paragraph 1 GG (Grundgesetz – German Constitution). At the same time, it represented an unjustified restriction of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of services guaranteed under Art. 43 and 49 EC. Due to the state betting monopoly’s inconsistency with the Constitution and with Community law during the period of time before the judgment of the Bundesverfassungsgericht on 28 March 2006, Section 284 StGB (Strafgesetzbuch – German Criminal Code) could not be applied to the offering of sports bets in the cases to be decided here, where acts carried out in the years 2003 to 2005 are to be considered (so-called “old casesâ€).â€
Gaminglaw.eu comes with more details and explains :
This means that, while the BGH in the “Schöner Wetten†decision in 2004 expressly demanded a German betting licence in order to exclude the applicability of Section 284 StGB, it now abandons this principle and turns to Community law.
Thus, if the new state treaty on gambling also violated Community law, an EU licence would be sufficient to exclude the applicability of Section 284 StGB, and thus a violation of competition.Â
•
Interesting case in France, where a court has decided that a bookmaker doesn’t have the right to use the trademark Juventus in order to promote one of his offers.
what if I say AC Milan ? 
Via casinowire
The Civil Court of First Instance in France has ruled that Unibet and William Hill were guilty of “counterfeiting†when they used the trademarked word “Juventus†on their websites in either comments or slogans to promote their betting action.
Both companies have been ordered to pay a €1 fine to Juventus as a token and €10,000 in legal fees each.
The court ruled that if the online sports betting operators are permitted to use brand names of sports teams to advertise games for which they are offering bets, this must be strictly limited to being used only when a bet is being placed.
Unibet’s mrbookmaker.com website carried a French slogan which translates as:
“Two giants of European football meet Tuesday night at 8.45pm. Real Madrid with its nine UEFA champions league victories will receive Juventus from Turin. This will be a special game for French player Zinedine Zidan who played in the Italian colours before joining the Spanish team.â€
Both operators expressly denied trying to use the name as a brand and implied that their intention was only to inform what betting options were available.
•
German gambling act, as expected, is officially challanged by the EU Commission that started the official investigation against Germany, as the internal Market commissioner Charlie McCreevy announced :
This new inquiry focuses on a number of provisions of the new legislation which entered into force on 1.1.2008. Some of the key restrictions that are questioned in terms of their compatibility with the EC Treaty’s Internal Market provisions are as follows: the total prohibition of games of chance on the Internet; notably sports betting, on which the Commission sent to Germany in March 2007 a detailed opinion; advertising restrictions on TV, on the Internet or on jerseys or billboards; and the prohibition on financial institutions to process and execute payments relating to unauthorised games of chance. In addition, questions are raised regarding the authorisation regime to be granted to intermediaries as well as the criminal sanctions or administrative fines provided for in cases of organisation, advertising and participation in on-line games of chance.
However, it should be noted that in Germany horse race betting on the Internet is not prohibited and slot machines have been widely expanded. Moreover, advertising of games of chance by mail, in the press and on radio is still permitted.
Sweden joined Germany on the chopping block for similar problems :
The European Commission has decided to send an official request for information on national legislation restricting the supply and promotion of certain gambling services to Sweden. In April 2006 the Commission sent a similar request for information to Sweden concerning sports betting (IP/06/436). In this new case the Commission wishes to verify whether all national measures relating to poker games and tournaments are consistent and therefore compatible with Article 49 of the EC Treaty, which guarantees the free movement of services. The Commission’s decision relates only to the compatibility of the national measures in question with existing EU law. It does not touch upon the existence of monopolies as such, or on national lotteries. Nor does it have any implications for the liberalisation of the market for gambling services generally, or for the entitlement of Member States to seek to protect the general interest, so long as this is done in a manner consistent with EU law i.e. that any measures are necessary, proportionate and non-discriminatory. The letter of formal notice is the first step in an infringement procedure under Article 226 of the EC Treaty. Sweden has two months in which to respond. The Commission hopes that the answer it receives will lead to an early and satisfactory resolution of the matter.
This latest inquiry into Swedish national gambling restrictions focuses on various issues relating to poker games and tournaments.
Poker games and tournaments are today offered in Swedish international casinos and, since 2006, the state-owned company also offers such services online on a large scale. However, the national legislation prevents online poker games and tournaments offered by operators licensed and regulated in other Member States. Also, it provides for restrictions and criminal sanctions on the promotion both of online poker offered by a licensed service provider in another Member State, and of poker organised within licensed premises in another Member State.
•
Italy has been convicted twice before the European Court of Justice for its gambling legislation, lack of clarity and infringement of the EU treaties. But where do we go from here?
Is the main result of these decisions the fact that Italian market is open for every new competitor ? Well, things are more complicated than it seems – Simon Banks has an interesting article that describes the present situation :
The liberalization of European gambling markets is proving long and somewhat tortuous as state monopolies struggle desperately to hang on to their privileged positions, despite the European Court of Justice consistently ruling in favor of operators trying to break into potentially lucrative markets. … Nowhere has the process been more fractious than in Italy, where two landmark rulings by the ECJ appear to have finally persuaded the Italian authorities that a system of licensing and regulating foreign operators is preferable to attempting prohibition.
(…)
With a relaxation of the regulatory regime thanks to pressure from Brussels, the Italian market would appear ripe for exploitation. However, an understanding of the Italian market and sports betting culture will be crucial for any operator seeking to take advantage of developments. While European operators, with their sports betting expertise, are leading the first wave of new entrants to the Italian market, it will probably be casino companies that will profit in the long term if, as expected, Italy eventually opens up its gaming market as it has its wagering market.
•
Law and Economics Professor Kalle Määttä was hired by the Finland Ministry of Health and External Affairs to draft a report on the problem of protecting chidren and gambling addicts.
 His report could lead to a change in the Finland’s gambling law in 2008 and 2009, but also to comply with the EC decisions, although other seem to undermine it :
 Here are some important ides of his report :
In his white paper, Professor Määttä suggests that it could be impossible to regulate foreign online gambling companies serving Finland, but says that gambling problems could be reduced by making it difficult for such companies to offer services there.
Professor Määttä offers three ways in which the government could achieve this:
 The first would be to restrict the flow of funds to and from foreign gambling providers. The second would be to require internet service providers to block access to foreign gambling sites. The third would be to give consumers a legal right to recover their losses from foreign gambling sites if they were deemed illegal.
On the question of whether Finland would offer state-controlled online gambling in the event of foreign operators being banned, Mr. Paaso was unequivocal. “There will be no opportunities. The government will not offer something like the Swedish online poker site. It does not seem right, on the one hand offering online poker to your citizens, and on the other hand blocking others from doing the same.â€
•
A series of important event have been happening at the end of the year in the EU-US gambling debate :
US has agreed with EU that it will pay a compensation rather than allow European online gaming companies into the American gambling sector.
This doesn’t solve the US problem with Antigua 
But US has also conceded to the EU to allow European companies access to the US postal market and warehouse sector instead.
EU gambling companies accuse US of infringing the WTO rules.
Washington said it never intended to allow foreign companies to offer online gambling and made a mistake by not explicitly saying so as part of the 1994 world trade deal.
“We have been left with no choice but to pursue all legal avenues available to challenge the U.S. Department of Justice for its discriminatory enforcement activities against European online gaming operators,” Clive Hawkswood, chief executive of the Remote Gambling Association (RGA), said in a statement. So RGA has filed a formal complaint against the Department of Justice.
And on top of that Google, Microsoft, Yahoo settled with the Justice Department over claims they promoted illegal gambling by accepting ads from online betting operations.
What a world !
</2007>
•
The suspension hearing on the appeal for the annulment of Decree No. 163/2007, which has changed the conditions of sale and collection of betting on the so-called marketing points, was accepted by the Tribunal in Roma
The appeal was submitted by the licensees of Microgame Spa and other 4 dealers: Pluralia, Replatz, PakundoBet and NorBet. “The Monopoly of State submitted a written statement which clearly betray the intentions of the decree: eliminating competition for operators who have invested on notice Bersani, told professor and lawyer Francis Cardarelli, who along with Fernando Petrivelli today the applicants. “For our part we have submitted data collection show that the decline visibly produced by decree, and we hope the suspension of a clear deterrent and therefore demolitore segment of the marketing.”
Read more »
•
This is the result of a TÃœV Rheinland and Hambach & Hambach law firm panel that met in Koln on 3 December to discuss about the initiatives of the drafters of a German States Treaty on gambling.
Online-casions.com covers the main subjects discussed :
Many past reports held that the State Treaty on Gambling violates constitutional and European law; for instance, EU Commissioner Charlie McCreevy is at present preparing proceedings against Germany based on the violation by the State Treaty of European law – even before the Treaty has come into effect.
Up to now, however, the legislator and the public conversation have neglected to involve technical experts in the debate. This is almost inconceivable, as a regulation which cannot be implemented in practice cannot be upheld from the legal point of view either, as Dr. Wulf Hambach stated.
This neglected technical discussion has now been addressed by an expert panel under the auspices of the TÃœV Rheinland. Rolf vom Stein (COO TÃœV Rheinland Secure iT GmbH) described the technical limits of Internet censorship, while Prof. Dr. Thomas Harmann-Wendels (managing director of the Institute for Banking Economy and Banking Law at the University of Cologne) provided information on the economic and technical obstacles connected with the interruption of payment streams (so-called financial blocking) which is an intention of the Treaty if it is signed.
Read more »
•
As I found reading the Net Bet Blog, a Bulgarian newspaper, Trud, reports on some changes in the gambling regulatory framework, by allowing online gambling – but also significant difference in the tax regime : the suggested change made by the Ministry of Finance – changing the tax on 10% of the total revenue to 10% of the profit.
The current estimates say revenues from legal betting in Bulgaria is around 350 million euros and not too far from 300 million euros is gambled illeagaly.
But seeing this news and talking about Eastern Europe always makes me wonder if there isn’t something else behind the curtain. This is how I find that, according to some sources , behind the amendments, as worded in the proposal, would also cover two private firms, both owned by Bulgaria’s richest man, Vassil Bozhkov, namely lottery Eurochance and bookmakers Eurofootball.
And this is why the current president Georgi Parvanov will veto the law, if it passes tha Parliament procedure, considering it just to support private interests.
So – things are more complicated then it seems.
•
Microgaming, the largest software house of gambling online, announces that the Lotteries and Gaming Authority LGA- Malta has issued a license online class IV for its casinos produced by the Lotteries and Gaming Authority LGA- Malta.
The license will bring benefits to partners of software providers who have the desire to work in Europe. In addition, provide a process easier for those operators who hope to put its headquarters in Malta making the trip much easier. A number of operators Microgaming will benefit from these new, having already begun the process to obtain a license from Malta in the footsteps of class IV of Microgaming.
Malta – the first member of the EU to regulate the game online, offers 4 classes online gambling licenses, subjecting the applicators to probity checks as part of a broader and targeted control of the business plan, technical expertise and a complete control of conformity. The license of Class IV of the complete casino license Class IV that Microgaming has been allocated for its network of poker at the beginning of this year.
In another news released this week, Microgaming announces that it strengthens its platform Poker in South America through one of the largest operators, the Chilean room www.mamamiagaming.com that hopes to grow increasingly on the continent in which it operates.
For now the highest concentration of the game Mamamia Poker operates in Chile and Argentina, but the idea is to increase membership in Europe thanks to entry in the network of Microgaming room that offers 19 different languages for managing game.