编辑注释

Steve Ruddock
{"title":"编辑注释","authors":"Steve Ruddock","doi":"10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorial","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Gaming Law ReviewVol. 27, No. 5 Notes from the EditorFree AccessNotes from the EditorSteve RuddockSteve RuddockSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:15 Jun 2023https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialAboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail The theme of this month's Editor's Notes is, get it right the first time. One of the top issues the U.S. gambling industry will need to grapple with in the coming months and years is clarity, or better said, lack thereof. Anyone reading this knows how varied, complex, and contradictory gaming laws can be. Add to that the frenetic pace of legalized sports betting in the U.S., and you have a recipe for disaster, and an additional murky layer of regulations isn't helping.Is it any wonder U.S. sports betting operators don't know what type of marketing is and isn't allowed? Whether it's Barstool's “Can't Lose Parlays” or Fanatics offering free bets to customers who purchase merchandise, operators are in a difficult position.Further complicating factors, 12 months ago, using terms like “risk-free bet” was commonplace, as were partnerships between sportsbooks and colleges. In a rush to legalize and launch, states failed to consider the ends operators would go to as they fought for market share and instead quibbled about tax rates and whether they should prohibit betting on in-state college teams.Now some states are trying to correct and clarify. They are finding that it is much easier to build something correctly from the start than go in and try to solve issues after the fact. The corrections add layers of complexity or conflict with other aspects of the laws and regulations, resulting in more problems to be fixed.That should be a lesson for the dozen or so states that haven't passed sports betting laws or the 43 states that may pass online poker or online casino laws. Get it right the first time.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 27Issue 5Jun 2023 InformationCopyright 2023, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:Steve Ruddock.Notes from the Editor.Gaming Law Review.Jun 2023.233-233.http://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialPublished in Volume: 27 Issue 5: June 15, 2023PDF download","PeriodicalId":44210,"journal":{"name":"Gaming Law Review-Economics Regulation Compliance and Policy","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Notes from the Editor\",\"authors\":\"Steve Ruddock\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorial\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Gaming Law ReviewVol. 27, No. 5 Notes from the EditorFree AccessNotes from the EditorSteve RuddockSteve RuddockSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:15 Jun 2023https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialAboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail The theme of this month's Editor's Notes is, get it right the first time. One of the top issues the U.S. gambling industry will need to grapple with in the coming months and years is clarity, or better said, lack thereof. Anyone reading this knows how varied, complex, and contradictory gaming laws can be. Add to that the frenetic pace of legalized sports betting in the U.S., and you have a recipe for disaster, and an additional murky layer of regulations isn't helping.Is it any wonder U.S. sports betting operators don't know what type of marketing is and isn't allowed? Whether it's Barstool's “Can't Lose Parlays” or Fanatics offering free bets to customers who purchase merchandise, operators are in a difficult position.Further complicating factors, 12 months ago, using terms like “risk-free bet” was commonplace, as were partnerships between sportsbooks and colleges. In a rush to legalize and launch, states failed to consider the ends operators would go to as they fought for market share and instead quibbled about tax rates and whether they should prohibit betting on in-state college teams.Now some states are trying to correct and clarify. They are finding that it is much easier to build something correctly from the start than go in and try to solve issues after the fact. The corrections add layers of complexity or conflict with other aspects of the laws and regulations, resulting in more problems to be fixed.That should be a lesson for the dozen or so states that haven't passed sports betting laws or the 43 states that may pass online poker or online casino laws. Get it right the first time.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 27Issue 5Jun 2023 InformationCopyright 2023, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:Steve Ruddock.Notes from the Editor.Gaming Law Review.Jun 2023.233-233.http://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialPublished in Volume: 27 Issue 5: June 15, 2023PDF download\",\"PeriodicalId\":44210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gaming Law Review-Economics Regulation Compliance and Policy\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gaming Law Review-Economics Regulation Compliance and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorial\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaming Law Review-Economics Regulation Compliance and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorial","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

博彩法律评论卷。27,第5号编辑笔记免费访问编辑笔记史蒂夫·鲁多克史蒂夫·鲁多克搜索本文作者的更多论文出版在线:2023年6月15日https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialAboutSectionsPDF/EPUB权限和CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack citations添加到收藏回到出版ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail本月编辑笔记的主题是,第一次得到正确的。美国博彩业在未来几个月和几年需要解决的首要问题之一是透明度,或者更确切地说,是缺乏透明度。任何读到这篇文章的人都知道游戏法则是多么多样、复杂和矛盾。再加上美国体育博彩合法化的疯狂步伐,你就有了一个灾难的配方,而额外的模糊监管层也无济于事。难怪美国体育博彩运营商不知道什么类型的营销是允许的,什么类型的营销是不允许的?无论是Barstool的“不能输掉赌注”,还是Fanatics为购买商品的顾客提供免费赌注,经营者都处于困境。更复杂的因素是,12个月前,使用“无风险投注”这样的术语是司空见惯的,体育博彩公司和大学之间的合作也是如此。在急于将赌博合法化并启动的过程中,各州没有考虑到运营商争夺市场份额的最终目的,而是在税率和是否应该禁止对州内大学球队下注等问题上争论不休。现在一些州正试图纠正和澄清。他们发现,从一开始就正确地构建一些东西比在事实发生后才尝试解决问题要容易得多。这些修正增加了法律和法规的复杂性或与其他方面的冲突,导致更多的问题需要解决。对于尚未通过体育博彩法的十几个州,以及可能通过在线扑克或在线赌场法的43个州来说,这应该是一个教训。第一次就把事情做好。数据参考资料相关信息第27卷第5期2023年6月信息版权所有2023,Mary Ann Liebert, Inc,出版商引用本文:Steve Ruddock。编辑注释。博彩法律评论。June 2023.233-233.http://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialPublished in Volume: 27 Issue 5: June 15, 2023PDF下载
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Notes from the Editor
Gaming Law ReviewVol. 27, No. 5 Notes from the EditorFree AccessNotes from the EditorSteve RuddockSteve RuddockSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:15 Jun 2023https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialAboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail The theme of this month's Editor's Notes is, get it right the first time. One of the top issues the U.S. gambling industry will need to grapple with in the coming months and years is clarity, or better said, lack thereof. Anyone reading this knows how varied, complex, and contradictory gaming laws can be. Add to that the frenetic pace of legalized sports betting in the U.S., and you have a recipe for disaster, and an additional murky layer of regulations isn't helping.Is it any wonder U.S. sports betting operators don't know what type of marketing is and isn't allowed? Whether it's Barstool's “Can't Lose Parlays” or Fanatics offering free bets to customers who purchase merchandise, operators are in a difficult position.Further complicating factors, 12 months ago, using terms like “risk-free bet” was commonplace, as were partnerships between sportsbooks and colleges. In a rush to legalize and launch, states failed to consider the ends operators would go to as they fought for market share and instead quibbled about tax rates and whether they should prohibit betting on in-state college teams.Now some states are trying to correct and clarify. They are finding that it is much easier to build something correctly from the start than go in and try to solve issues after the fact. The corrections add layers of complexity or conflict with other aspects of the laws and regulations, resulting in more problems to be fixed.That should be a lesson for the dozen or so states that haven't passed sports betting laws or the 43 states that may pass online poker or online casino laws. Get it right the first time.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 27Issue 5Jun 2023 InformationCopyright 2023, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:Steve Ruddock.Notes from the Editor.Gaming Law Review.Jun 2023.233-233.http://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2023.29080.editorialPublished in Volume: 27 Issue 5: June 15, 2023PDF download
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
33.30%
发文量
54
期刊最新文献
GAMBLING, CRYPTOCURRENCY, AND FINANCIAL TRADING SPONSORSHIP IN HIGH-LEVEL MEN'S SOCCER LEAGUES: AN UPDATE FOR THE 2023/2024 SEASON OVERVIEW OF MACAU'S LEGISLATION ON GAMBLING: 1961–2023 CHINESE ONLINE GAMBLING ESPORTS REGULATIONS: WHO IS TARGETED FOR CRACKDOWNS? WHY ARE THERE DOUBLE STANDARDS? U.S. FEDERAL AGENCY REJECTS POLITICAL PREDICTION MARKET UNITED STATES OF AMERICAbefore theCOMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSIONIn the Matter of the Certification by KalshiEX LLC of Derivatives Contracts with Respectto Political Control of the United States Senate and United States House of RepresentativesORDER
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1