for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
The California Senate has made further adjustments to Assembly Bill 831 (AB 831), which aims to eliminate online sweepstakes casinos across the state. Legislators have clarified that this bill does not intend to affect state lottery games or the occasional sweepstakes promotions that arise, but fully ban online sweepstakes casinos.
The revised language clearly states: “(a) It is unlawful for any person or entity to operate, conduct, or offer an online sweepstakes game in this state.”
Additionally, it outlines that “(b) It is unlawful for any entity, financial institution, payment processor, geolocation provider, gaming content supplier, platform provider, or media affiliate to knowingly and willfully support directly or indirectly the operation, conduct, or promotion of an online sweepstakes game within this state.
Some of the Senate’s changes were more focused on refining certain terms rather than changing the focus of the bill. For instance, “gambling-themed games” has been shortened to simply “gambling,” while “casino-style table games” is now referred to as “table games.”
‘Limited and Occasional’ Marketing Promotions Allowed
The revised version also introduces a key update that aims to address concerns raised by sweepstakes and social gaming operators, as well as various associations.
These groups have argued that the legislation could criminalize promotions and sweepstakes commonly offered by retailers like McDonald’s and Starbucks, a concern that has been recurring against similar proposed sweep bans, even outside California.
“The bill would specify that these provisions do not make unlawful game promotions or sweepstakes conducted by for-profit commercial entities on a limited and occasional basis as an advertising and marketing tool that are incidental to substantial bona fide sales of consumer products or services and that are not intended to provide a vehicle for the establishment of ongoing gambling or gaming,” the revised version reads.
Further Protection for Players
The latest amendment also introduces a new Section 1 that specifies the bill targets only those who “knowingly and intentionally” engage in or promote online sweepstakes games that use a dual-currency system. This means that ancillary service providers, who may unknowingly be involved in these activities, may not face penalties.
Additionally, the bill clarifies that entities such as gaming suppliers, platform providers, banks, payment processors, geolocation providers, and media affiliates can still be held accountable for their support of sweepstakes.
However, this accountability applies only if the act is “knowingly and willfully,” a phrase that has been added in this new version of the bill.
Earlier changes made during the committee stage in July included the addition of the word knowingly” to this provision. Lawmakers also removed the term “person” from the list of parties that could be criminalized for participating in sweepstakes plays, ensuring that individual players would not face legal repercussions for using these gaming platforms.
Cities Cardrooms Join Small Tribes in Opposing the Bill
AB 831 has received significant support from the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation and several other significant gaming tribes, as well as the California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA). Despite this backing, some opposition has surfaced recently.
A few smaller tribes, including the Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation of the Cortina Rancheria, which partners with social gaming giant VGW, have voiced their concerns against the bill. Additionally, Publishers Clearing House (PCH), now owned by a social gaming company, has also opposed the legislation.
The California Cities Gaming Authority, which advocates for cardrooms, along with several cities hosting cardrooms, has raised objections to the bill as well.
Earlier in July, a rep from a cardroom expressed disappointment during the initial Senate committee hearing, suggesting that the legislation should have considered the needs of cardrooms more carefully. Documentation filed late last month for the upcoming Senate vote also reflects these concerns.
Source: SBCAmericas
