Nolan Dalla Comments on Minnesota’s Great Internet Gambling Firewall

When the People’s Republic of China began cracking down on its citizens and their internet access a few years ago, many civil libertarians and human rights activists issued dire warnings.  They cautioned us that various forms of government and corporate-assisted censorship would eventually find their way to American shores. They were right.

Censorship is alive and well in the land of the so-called “free.”  George Orwell’s “1984” has very much become reality, albeit 25 years after the British novelist’s ominous forecast.  Minnesota, of all places, has become the new Oceania. Recently, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, through its Gambling Enforcement Division, instructed several major telephone companies and internet service providers (ISPs) to block access from computers based in Minnesota to hundreds of online gambling websites.  The list of companies that were notified in the public advisory included AT&T, Comcast, Direct TV, Embarq, Sprint/Nextel, Qwest, Verizon, and others.

What all this means is a few un-elected and inaccessible bureaucrats in Minnesota are about to take a butcher knife to the freedoms of 5,197,621 residents of their state.  Minnesota’s online poker players are about to run head-on into a massive firewall cemented by Big Brother, with many of America’s largest corporations faithfully holding up the scaffolding as bricklayers.  Perhaps most alarming is the fact that no one so far – except activists in the poker community – has uttered a peep of protest.

There are so many things wrong with Minnesota’s proceedings that it’s almost impossible to know where to begin to respond.  First, the public advisory was riddled with errors.  The agency falsely stated that online gambling (which includes online poker, by its interpretation) is illegal under federal law.  This is false.  It’s a lie.  There is no existing legal precedent that supports this assertion.  Furthermore, the head of the state agency that issued the official statement sounded as though he was reading from the Family Research Council’s website.  He obviously did very little research on the subject of online gambling.  In defending the State’s rambling threats, the agency spokesman even pulled out that old moldy chestnut about online gambling being used to finance terrorism.  Yeah right.  It’s always disconcerting to know that the bad beat I took yesterday playing online poker funded the purchase of another rocket launcher in Tora Bora.

Next, blocking Minnesota residents and their access to online gambling websites is not within the range of permissible options that exist under state or federal law.  It’s also a highly questionable priority given that this is a state agency which has previously disclosed that it’s understaffed and ill-funded to carry out vital tasks (no one would argue against the agency’s right to investigate legitimate criminal acts).

Then, there’s recent history, which clearly shows this is a terrible idea.  Whenever and wherever implemented, attacking internet gambling websites (not just online poker, but all forms of internet gambling) has proven to be a monumental waste of time and resources.  For instance, can anyone justify passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIEGA) or make a credible case that online gambling has decreased because of the law?  Perhaps most crucial, there is absolutely no groundswell of public support for this policy.  None whatsoever.  If that’s not a miscarriage of the public’s trust, I don’t know what is.

The next chapter of this charade promises to be the most interesting and potentially the most shameful.  How will telephone companies and ISPs react to the notice?  Will these companies yield all liberties and let some obscure bureaucrat instruct them on how to run their businesses?  Will the companies abide by a confusing pronouncement, void of any attached enforcement capacity?  What are the prescribed penalties for non-compliance?  Are there any?  If so, who will make that decision?  Will these same companies, which have enormous power, money, and influence over every sphere of American life, ever take a stand against something based on principle or will they simply go along with this crazed censorship frenzy because protesting might cost them a few bucks fighting in court?

Let’s make this clear: A state government agency is using an outdated and non-applicable federal law (the Wire Act of 1961) to demand that companies enforce its interpretations of statutes.  If I were running an ISP, after throwing the State’s advisory in my office wastebasket, my initial response would be, “Show me any state or federal law that makes my compliance mandatory.”  If the State’s own band of court jesters can somehow answer, my next question would be, “Okay, where’s the money?”  The State wants companies to enforce an online gambling ban?  Sure, no problem.  Provide us with all of the funds to pay for additional personnel.  Pay all of the costs of monitoring and enforcing these laws.  Be sure to keep several key people who work in the Department of Public Safety available for updates and regular consultation.  What a monumental waste of time and money that would be, and for what purpose?

The sad fact is that there’s not much we can do to stop government officials in Minnesota if they want to join the ranks of China, North Korea, and Iran when it comes to the internet.  So, the next line of defense comes with corporations.  A very different firewall needs to be plowed in the sand now by companies that have remained embarrassingly silent on this issue for far too long.  Their track record is appalling.  When this sort of thing happened previously (in China), Cisco Systems, Yahoo, America Online, Google, Skype, and even Microsoft went along and simply followed orders.  There were no protests.  No standing up for human rights.  No campaigns for freedom of the internet.  No platform based on principle.  They sold their souls for profit and became willing participants in the destruction of individual rights.

Poker players have been abandoned by corporations before.  The banks remained largely silent while various bills in Congress were being debated for a decade that ultimately led to the passage of UIEGA.  Online payment processors, including PayPal and later Neteller, threw us under the bus when things got tough.  Companies that operate on the same principles as online gambling sites such as eBay openly supported an internet gambling ban.  The voices of high-tech companies, started mostly by young idealistic pioneers who were once dedicated to freedom of the internet, have been deafening when it comes to speaking out.

Sometime, someday, somewhere, a critical issue will arise when all of these companies will beg for the support of rank and file American citizens, including poker players.  When it comes to fighting for our rights, we will have long memories.  We must always remember who it was that stood with us.  We will also remember who went along silently and who was part of the problem instead of being part of the solution.

Nolan Dalla can be contacted at nolandalla@aol.com.