8/20/19
EARLY GAME- CLASSIFICATION WARS
Early on, federal regulators and prosecutors viewed the visual similarity between the electronically aided bingo games and traditional slot machines as blurring the line of game classification. A number of cases were filed by the federal government based on the following theories: Because Class II games look and act like slot machines(i.e., they’re faster-paced than traditional/manual bingo; require more investment; and involve a greater risk of loss), they are electronic facsimiles/Class III. Congress intended Class II gaming to be less lucrative than Class III gaming. There is no implied exemption to the Johnson Act with regard to Class II technological aids.
LACK OF JUDICIAL ENDORSEMENT
In the early game-classification cases, the 1992 definitions of “electronic aid” and “electronic/electromechanical facsimile” proved unhelpful. In fact, federal courts, including at least 3 Circuit Courts of Appeal, implicitly rejected the Commission’s definitions: “ Boiled down to their essence, the regulations tell us little more than that a class II aid is something that is not a class III facsimile. ” Diamond Game Enterprises v. Reno , 230 F.3d 365, 369 (D.C. Cir. 2000). “ The decision is a ‘ simple one that may be accomplished solely by examining the statute itself (that is, without looking to the Commission ’ s rules). ’” Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. National Indian Gaming Commission , 14 F.3d 633 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
11
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online