UIGEA SLAMMED BY MEDIA WATCHDOG

wanbet-bc518

Not only is the Unlawful Internet Gambling enforcement Act the "stupidest" law passed by Congress...it's also one of the worst!

Congressmen Barney Frank is not alone in his contempt for the US Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which he recently dubbed as the "stupidest law passed by Congress" in his announcement that he will attempt to have it repealed soon. This week he was joined by an influential media watchdog in condemning the UIGEA as a bad law.

Media Channel.org was founded in New York in the year 2000 and concerns itself with the political, cultural and social impacts of the media, large and small. It exists to provide information and diverse perspectives and inspire debate, collaboration, action and citizen engagement and is widely regarded as the first media and democracy "supersite."

The site recently turned the spotlight on the banning of online gambling financial transactions when it published an opinion on what it regards as the worst and best laws...and not surprisingly the UIGEA and a law seeking to control the Internet were among the worst. This is what it has to say about the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act:

"This law is a flagship example of how special interest lobbying combined with legislative mumbling can produce an unreadable mess.

"First, the law is written in unintelligible Congress-ese. Second, the law is pockmarked with special interest exceptions, clearly showing who has the best lobbyists. Third, and most importantly, Congress did not specify (in this law or elsewhere) what constitutes illegal Internet gambling, yet the law requires third-party money sources to block the flow of money to illegal gambling operations. "Thus, as Kafka might write it, Congress deputizes private actors to block illegal activity without deciding for itself what constitutes illegal activity. As a result, banks and other money sources probably will curtail lots of legitimate activity to be on the safe side."

Media Channel reserves the bottom position in the "Worst Laws" category for another Internet-based law - the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996.

Media Channel opines:  "This was Congress’ first comprehensive attempt to regulate Internet content. Not surprisingly, Congress made a lot of rookie mistakes. The CDA tried to keep kids away from Internet porn, a reaction to a sensational 1995 article (the “Rimm Report”) published in the Georgetown Law Journal that proclaimed that the Internet was awash in porn. But later examinations thoroughly discredited the Rimm Report—meaning that Congress’ efforts/over-reactions were based on bad social science.

"Worse, Congress mistakenly assumed that non-porn content could be easily segregated from porn. In defense of this assumption, the government’s expert witness proposed a content-tagging system that would enable browsers to wall off porn. But this exposed a deep flaw in the law: the tagging system didn’t exist, browsers weren’t written to honor the tag, and it turns out that requiring publisher self-tagging for all Internet content is burdensome and cost-prohibitive.

"Because web and email content publishers had no easy way to comply with the law, the law threatened to restrict virtually every Internet speaker. Further, Congress imposed punitive and draconian sanctions (including stiff jail time) for breaking the law. Congress really, really wanted to wipe porn off the Internet, but it chose a particularly mean-spirited way of doing so.

"Not surprisingly, the law fared poorly in the courts. Within a week, it was enjoined. The next year, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously struck down the law. For its lack of policy support, its sloppy blunderbuss approach to regulating speech, and its flat-out meanness, I hereby crown the CDA the worst Internet law (to date…).