Online casino gaming is illegal even in video games.
Second Life, a virtual world created by Linden Lab, has shut down all casinos and gambling establishments in the virtual reality game world.
What is Second Life?
Second Life (SL) is an Internet-based virtual world that was launched in 2003 - think of it like a more advanced version of The Sims. The “Residents” of Second Life download the Second Life Viewer which allows you to interact in the world, talking to people, trade items, play games etc. It’s like a massive multiplayer game version of MySpace - like social networking but video game style. Players in the game do business using the Linden Dollar (Linden / L$) which can be exchanged for real-world currency. About 10 million accounts are currently registered.
How would players bet and gamble on Second Life?
Well, they would use Linden Dollars to bet. As a Second Lifer puts it, “Definitely, no more sploders & raffle balls. Can also see prize pot games getting the ax because they select winners by random. Seems the only way to pick up a few L$ that hasn’t been nuked by LL is camping. I understand the policy, and I do agree with it for the most part, but it just seems like SL is being forced to taste more and more like tofu with every new policy - bland and flavorless.”
What’s going to get affected by this decision?
Well this is going to affect the Casino-style islands that are found in the video game. This will then be a snowball effect which will then directly affect Linden Labs because the owners of these islands are some of the biggest financial contributors. They pay land rental fees and currency fees to Linden Labs, so this must have been a hard decision for the company.
Ugh - UIGEA strikes again
It’s obvious that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) is behind this. Linden Labs, even though they are potentially losing big money from the players by banning this, is trying to prevent heat coming from government officials and the FBI. There’s no word if the FBI has contacted Linden Labs - but I wouldn’t doubt there’s at least some conversation that lead to this decision.
I’d love to know how the loyal gambling population of Second Life feels about this decision. Furthermore, I have a more interesting question. Has anyone done any research to see if the players who gamble on Second Life are gamblers in real life? In other words, do they also play at online casinos like SunPoker or real life casinos like the Mirage?
If they don’t, then this poses an interesting question. Does stopping players from gambling actually promote players to move to “real” gambling at online casinos? Maybe these players that used to get their gambling fix at virtual worlds like Second Life now move to the big boys of gambling like PokerStars. All this while the supposed reason for the UIGEA was to prevent gambling addictions by making gambling too accessible.
Will the power of the UIGEA ever fade away?
Related posts:
- The Psychology of Real Life Casinos
- Do Online Casinos Cause Gambling Addictions?
- How Spiderman Can Make You Money in Online Casinos
- List of Online Casinos Compatible with Linux
- The InterCasino Banned Commercial
- Online Casino Decision Has Been Delayed by the WTO
- U.S. Takes on Online Gambling: Huge Fines to Microsoft, Yahoo, & Google
- Poker is a Game of Skill According to Danish Court
- The Massachusetts Mandate: Bet Online and Go to Jail
- The State of the Online Poker World in 2007
Subscribe to the RSS Feed
November 12th, 2007 at 1:35 am
This actually happened months ago, it’s old news.
It also didn’t have a far reaching effect on the Second Life economy, as the only people really making any money were a few large casino owners, while the rest merely got by with pennies. Very few casino owners owned islands and those who did had multiple businesses on those islands for the most part.
The UIGEA was not about preventing gambling addictions, it was about stopping the flow of US$ out of the US and into the hands of foreign online gaming site owners.
The strongest supporters of the UIGEA were the large casino owners in states like Nevada who weren’t happy with competing with the gaming sites.
[Reply]
November 12th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
I agree with your points. I’ll add to my original point by stating that those government officials pushing the UIGEA act were using “morality” as the public face to the bill.
Guys like Senator Jon Kyl, a major proponent of UIGEA (who by the way is so inept he thinks that “online gambling is already illegal”) has made many public statements using morality as his basis to abolish internet casino gaming, such as: “Online poker is currently the most addictive form of gambling activity among American youth. The National Annenberg Risk Survey of Youth (ages 14 to 22) over the last few years has identified rising trends in poker and Internet gambling as significant and worrisome.”
Of course, bottom-line, it all comes down to $.
[Reply]