Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Role Playing (Games)

Second Life Shuts Down Gambling 263

Tech.Luver sends us to The Inquirer, which notes the banning of all gambling in Second Life. Here is the Linden Labs blog post about the change in policy, which is, to say the least, not popular. From the article: "[T]he large chunk of users that enjoyed using in-world casinos and betting Linden Dollars on events both inside and outside the game world will now have nothing left to do. Perhaps more to the point for Linden, the move will cut off the revenues earned from those owning Casino-style islands in the game, the owners of which are some of the top contributors to the Linden coffers through currency fees and land rental."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Second Life Shuts Down Gambling

Comments Filter:
  • 1 down... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SatanicPuppy ( 611928 ) * <> on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:19AM (#19996159) Journal
    That cuts the attractions of SL by 50%...When the "Think of the Children" crowd gets 'em to ban sex, Second Life will become officially pointless.

    On the one hand, I get it. Since the Linden actually has a conversion rate with "real" money, the gambling is gambling for "real" money and there are all kinds of laws about that, including last years
    Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, which is directed at the companies that host gambling sites, rather than the players, making it much easier to enforce. I can't see Linden bucking that, though a sneaky gambling "underground" would be awesome, far far cooler than actual legal gambling.

    On the other hand, what a bunch of nanny-state crap.
    • Re:1 down... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by afidel ( 530433 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:24AM (#19996225)
      what a bunch of nanny-state crap

      It's actually a twofer for the senators, they get to throw a bone to their religious right and nanystate voters and they get to support the interests of their entrenched corporate gambling masters.
      • It's so nice when bipartisan initiatives take off. Blech. Parent = +1 Informative.

        Can't we give congress more vacations? Maybe if they were in session less they'd make fewer interferances into the lives of the common citizen. In the early years of the US, didn't congress only meet for a few weeks out of the year?
        • Therefore, in order to justify their salaries, they have to make new laws.

          Over time, all the easy laws are created. Which doesn't leave much for Congress to make laws about.

          What we need to do is to have all laws expire after 12 or 16 years (or whatever) so Congress can spend their time voting to pass old laws again.

          That way your Congress Critters could justify their salaries AND we'd have a chance of getting rid of stupid, bad laws.

          On the downside, once you finally got a law passed despite all the corporate
          • Na, I like my idea. Going along with the old idea, that all the good laws are obvious and the fewer laws the better. All laws on the federal level should require a 3/4 majority to pass, then require only a 3/7 (or something just under 1/2) majority to strike old laws (meaning striking the whole law as passed and line item striking would provide the ability for 3/7 to effectively create their own laws). You would get rid of crap laws easier and make it tougher to create new ones. So they would have something
            • In many states laws have a time limit and they automatically expire and must be repassed.

              The problem is as enough of these laws build up, the representatives start repassing them as big clumps.

              I would like to see laws that last forever require a 90% majority. Laws that last a lifetime (50 years) would require a 66% majority. A 51% majority could only pass laws that would last 8 years.

              • Who says that 90% of our government now is insightful forever though? What laws would EVER get 90% approval?!
                • by k_187 ( 61692 )
                  I would believe that is the point.
                • A law that has 90% support is likely to be fundamental magna carta type stuff or mob rule type stuff (anti-communism comes to mind). The second is a bit disturbing and happens now. The fundamental stuff like murder, bribery and so on should not have to be repassed because you run into situations where they screw up and a murderer gets off because it wasn't illegal to commit murder for a few weeks until they repassed the laws.

                  Stuff like that actually happens right now when some of these temporary laws expi
      • Didn't Abramoff make a career living off that twofer?
    • Bah. Screwed up my hyperlink somehow... Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 []
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by UbuntuDupe ( 970646 ) *
      I find this kind of funny because when I played, back in '03, one of the examples they gave you on how to write scripts, was a slot machine program.

      But anyway, isn't it still possible to gamble online in the US? I see ads for, I think, all the time, or used to. How can that be legal but not this?

      On the one hand, I get it. Since the Linden actually has a conversion rate with "real" money, the gambling is gambling for "real" money and there are all kinds of laws about that

      Yes, such as tax law. As I've argued before [], there are serious consequencs to the convertibility of online game currencies. If it can qualify for gambling laws, it can qualify for ingame taxation.

      I also

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by dAzED1 ( 33635 )
      SatanicPuppy (611928) When the "Think of the Children" crowd gets 'em to ban sex, Second Life will become officially pointless.

      having "sex" in SecondLife, or any other game, is already pointless. That you would even call it sex, and not at least "sex," is very sad. You do understand the point of sex is, well, the physical touch, and the bonding from the intimacy? Neither of which is remotely possible, err, remotely. Rather, neither of which is remotely possible in a game.

      Wake me when it looks at all re
      • Don't look at me, I don't even like phone sex.

        Anyway, I used too many "air quotes" in that post already, without adding more. If someone is confused enough about the nature of SL to think that they can have actual sex, I don't feel any requirement to enlighten them.
      • Re:1 down... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Remus Shepherd ( 32833 ) <> on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:54AM (#19996647) Homepage
        I think you miss the point of sex in Second Life, or anywhere else online. 'Physical touch' has nothing to do with it.

        Internet sex is all about the fantasy. The point of it is doing things you would never do, whether that be new partners, positions, or species. It might be as timid as a housewife who would never cheat in RL experiencing a fake affair, or it might be as extreme as snuff/vore/rape play. Either way, it's about experiences one would never and should never pursue in real life. Making it more 'realistic' -- as in better graphics -- would be nice, but making it real would *ruin* the concept.

        You don't pay hookers in real life to have sex with you, you pay them to go away afterwards. You don't pay hookers over the internet to have sex with you, you pay them to be imaginary and stay that way.
        • by Unoti ( 731964 )
          Exactly, spot on. Sadly though many people around here are too up tight to even have a rational discussion about GPL3, much less cybersex, so you'll probably get flamed ;)
      • by Fozzyuw ( 950608 )

        You do understand the point of sex is, well, the physical touch, and the bonding from the intimacy?

        I would simply say that the only reason for sex is to procreate, nothing more. The whole bonding due to physical intimacy or "consummating of a marriage" / chastity cliche are all based on man-made social 'rules' which differ depending on ones society and have nothing to do with it's actual purpose. Though, I do agree follow some of those social rules, doesn't change the point of sex.


        • If you believe the desire for it developed because of its evolutionary function in procreation, then surely you can also see the evolutionary benefit to the offspring in having parents feel bonded to each other. My point is that that is something natural, not something "social."
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Dephex Twin ( 416238 )
          Don't knock it till you've tried it.
    • by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
      That cuts the attractions of SL by 50%...When the "Think of the Children" crowd gets 'em to ban sex, Second Life will become officially pointless.

      It's like a storm in a jar. I agree it's not fair to Linden Labs. But.

      Sex in Second Life - isn't that already pointless. I've always wondered what kind of people hang into this game. It's all about gambling and 3D porn, it's pretty sad.
    • To some country with more relaxed online laws, maybe including startup of a new company ;-)
      Like Slysoft, which distributes some programs that were originally developed by a German/Swiss company but are no longer legal to sell in the EU(CD/DVD copy programs including CSS decryption).

    • Re:1 down... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by venicebeach ( 702856 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @11:50AM (#19997601) Homepage Journal

      Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, which is directed at the companies that host gambling sites
      Actually the law is directed not at companies that host gambling sites, but rather at companies that transfer money to and from gambling sites. Since Linden effectively does both, they would be affected by the law.
    • I'd be willing to bet there have been some legal moves made towards Linden Labs investigating online gambling and this is a preemptive move on their part.

      With the ability to freely buy Linden dollars with real money and sell it back, there's essentially no difference between SL gambling and Casino gambling - just that in Casinos they call them poker chips. It's got nothing to do with morality, nanny states, etc.
  • Just got this from one of my SL groups:

    "Protest the end of SL Casinos! [] Protest Encroachment of
    Real-Life US law into Second Life... 1 PM today... pplease IM all your
    friends about this demonstration at governor Linden's Mansion.."
    • Totally pointless. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by paladinwannabe2 ( 889776 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:30AM (#19996315)
      Protesting in Second Life about stupid laws passed by Congress is as useful as protesting in Australia about stupid laws passed by Congress. It's possible (if unlikely) that other people will notice you and report it to someone whose opinion matters, but you can't blame Linden Labs for following the law any more than you could blame Australia's Prime Minister for being unable to change U.S. policy.
      • Well, it's a good thing that Australia isn't based in the US...
      • foreigners living outside the country.
      • Bad bad analogy. The Australian Prime Minister isn't subject to U.S policy.
        • I never said that the PM was subject to U.S. policy, but he's certainly affected by U.S. policy. For instance, gambling operations in the U.K. catering to U.S. customers have been driven out of business by U.S. law, just like the gambling in Second Life has been driven out of business by the very same law. Countries are interconnected through trade, diplomacy and tourism, so policy in one country can have serious effects on another.
        • Bad bad analogy. The Australian Prime Minister isn't subject to U.S policy.
          Perhaps not but Antigua seems to be [] even though it is outside of its jurisdiction.

          Sorry to post another US policing the world comment but as it is related to online gambling it seems relevant.
  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:26AM (#19996251) Journal
    Where we will allow gambling and all other vices not available in Second Life.
  • At least (Score:5, Funny)

    by niceone ( 992278 ) * on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:27AM (#19996255) Journal
    Well at least they can still buy and sell genitals. If LL ever shut that down... that would be a low blow.
  • I bet... (Score:5, Funny)

    by bumby ( 589283 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:29AM (#19996295)
    I bet $100 that people will continue to gamble anyways, anyone want to bet against?
  • Here's an idea... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by computerman413 ( 1122419 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:29AM (#19996299)
    1) Move to country with no Internet gambling laws 2) Start an online game like Second Life, but with gambling allowed 3) Profit! Seriously, I think the only reason the government banned online gambling was because they couldn't effectively tax it.
    • by ivan256 ( 17499 )

      Seriously, I think the only reason the government banned online gambling was because they couldn't effectively tax it.

      Why couldn't they effectively tax it? If the company running the game simply started reporting conversions from in-game currency to US dollars to the IRS as income it would do two things:

      • Make it difficult for people to avoid taxes on their winnings and profit
      • Discourage people from converting between in-game money and real money, thus helping their profits

      The same standards could be applie

      • "...and the existing gambling establishment."

        Not according to your own logic. All they have to do is abide within the gambling laws and make sure no one scams their way out of the taxes on winnings. This would put them on equal footing.
        • by ivan256 ( 17499 )
          I think you're confusing my comments about what is really happening with my suggestion as to how they could avoid taxation problems.
    • And never plan on setting foot on US jurisdiction because you'll get arrested like the Betonsports guys.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by ubrgeek ( 679399 )
      No, Congress was confused over how the money would move through the tubes...
  • Baccarat

    Don't those games have some skill to them?

    I recall that efforts have been made to reclassify poker as a game of skill and not a game of chance, to get around gambling laws.
    • The main difference between poker and blackjack...

      Blackjack is a game of luck that involves skill.

      Poker is a game of skill that involves luck.
      • If playing in a casino,

        With enough skill at blackjack, you can beat the casino.
        With enough skill at poker, you can pay the casino and beat your friends.
        • You play against your friends in a casino? tsk.

          I play *with* my friends in a casino... big difference, if we're at the same table. Not necessarily colluding, but staying out of each other's way taking the fish's money.
          • I play *with* my friends in a casino... big difference, if we're at the same table. Not necessarily colluding, but staying out of each other's way taking the fish's money.

            The thing is, you don't have to intentionally collude. If you've been playing home games with your frields for months, you should all know each other's tells, habits, betting strategy, risk tolerance, etc - as I'm sure you do. You can't just forget that at a casino. So it's a huge advantage when a group of friends play together at a t

    • Just about all SL's casino games, including the ones you listed, are single-player affairs generated by scripted machines. There aren't human dealers or other human players to out-skill.
      • by Hatta ( 162192 )
        The dealers behavior in blackjack is always scripted, even in a real casino. Just because you're playing against an algorithm doesn't mean it's not a game of skill.
        • That's a very good point, but one which leads to another factor in this whole situation I hadn't even considered before.

          In legal casinos such as those in Las Vegas or Atlantic City, the human dealers and digital gambling machines are subject to stringent licensing and auditing procedures. However, in SL anyone with rudimentary building and scripting skills can build a gambling machine, and anyone who buys a piece of virtual land could put a casino on it. Since nobody was watching them, they could fiddle
  • Casinos in MMOs (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lemmy Caution ( 8378 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:32AM (#19996363) Homepage
    Other MMOs have (player-run) casinos, because they don't support exchange between their virtual currencies and real-world cash. Now, here's a couple questions.

    If Linden introduced a "play money" currency in the game that wasn't officially convertible to cash, but allowed players to decide to accept it for whatever they wanted (including in-game cash), would that also be illegal in the US?

    Sony Online games are divided into two, with a minority of servers for games like EQ2 allowing real-money transactions and the majority disallowing it. Is gambling legal on the majority of those servers, but illegal in the minority?

    This really does push the question of how virtual these virtual worlds really are.
  • by Rob T Firefly ( 844560 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:36AM (#19996413) Homepage Journal
    To summarize my recent rambling journal post on the subject, [] there are many SL residents (including myself) who appreciate this move. The casinos really tended to trash the sims in which they set up shop, in both functional and aesthetic ways.

    It's worth noting that online gambling has been illegal in the US for a while now, [] and it's something of a surprise that Linden let things continue for so long.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by plague3106 ( 71849 )
      Sure, because we should limit what people can do in a free society because you don't like how things look. The fact is gambling should not be illegal at all, just like prostitution or "illegal" drugs.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        SL is not a "free society," it's a simulated world which is operated by an American entity, and which uses virtual currency that is openly exchangable for the real thing. As such, it needs to abide by the law or it puts its entire operation at legal risk.

        At any rate, the issue isn't gambling itself, at least for me. I'm no gambler beyond the occasional lotto scratchcard, but I don't mind at all that it exists. Let people have their fun, I just won't be joining in. However, the implementation of same in
    • by Frosty Piss ( 770223 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @11:31AM (#19997229)
      Jesus. You really need to get a First Life.
    • by afabbro ( 33948 )
      The casinos really tended to trash the sims in which they set up shop, in both functional and aesthetic ways.

      Gee, just like in real life.

  • Anyone remember Friendster? It was MySpace before MySpace existed. Then the founder tried to intrusively control how people related to each other. Result?: Friendster died, and MySpace, amongst a host of impersonators, but one that wasn't so intrusive (at least socially, nevermind MySpace's instrusive assault on your sense of web aesthetics) catapulted into popularity. Read all about it in detail [].

    So if I were a betting man (no pun intended), I would abandon Second Life now, and look into the most promising of Second Life's impersonators that doesn't intrude on your freedoms like Second Life.

    People do not like unnecessary intrusions on their freedoms, in real life or on the Internet. However, unlike real life, people can vote with their feet a lot more effectively on the Internet, and simply leave and encamp somewhere else, en masse. Carpe Diem, Website investors.

    The promise of Second Life, if there is any at all, is that it would allow you to do things you can't do in real life. So what does Second Life do? Make it more just like real life, and kill off what would make Second Life attractive to anyone who would want to go there in the first place, and/ or stay there. (Smacks forehead.)

    In Second Life's defense, perhaps they are under political pressure to abandon online gambling, which would make sense owing to being based in the USA and the USA's current retarded attitude towards online gambling [].

    Well then relocate your servers to Antigua [].

    Or make a poor policy choice, piss off your users, and wither and die.

    Study the Friendster warning example carefully, dear Second Life executives.
    • Well then relocate your servers to Antigua.

      I'm not sure you understand the current status of the US internet gambling law. Antigua is fighting the US in the WTO over the fact that the US's restrictions on online gambling are against WTO treaty, since they favor US gambling houses. However, currently the law is in force, and Antiguan casinos cannot wire winnings to the US.

      Note that under current US law, restrictions on foreign casinos operating online are tighter than restrictions on domestic casinos oper

    • "Well then relocate your servers to Antigua." The owners of SL don't want to relocate out of the US. Don't you remember the case from several months to a year ago where the US arrested the executives of a company based out of the UK (I think, it might have been a Scandinavian country) that had transferred winnings from online casinos to US players (and vice versa) when said executives changed planes at a US airport? (I may be garbling the details of this case, but the relevant portions are correct. If anyo
  • I know other games don't make it as easy to convert your 'real' money to virtual currency, but I have yet to see a player-run casino banned in Everquest, EQ2, etc. (Can't speak for WoW ... didn't play long enough to tell).
    • They banned player run casinos in WoW in early 2005(iirc). You couldn't even gamble for "real" money; they had some sort of "it's not what we want the game to be about and there are a lot of instances of fraud" crap. Not much of a stink over it.
      • interesting. I haven't really played since 2 months after the launch (hit 60 and was nothing to do) ... I did run a casino for a short time myself, it was legit, and fun... I dressed up my character, role played, and had drinks and themed food. Small time shop didn't run more than a few hundred gold either way but it was a fun experience.
        • Yea, I thought they were cool as well. Imho, the thing that makes a game great is when people take it to the next level and do things that you didn't originally foresee...That shows that your system is powerful and flexible.

          I played WoW for a good long time. Still have an account, but I haven't signed in in a month or so. It always takes me a while, depending on how cool the game is, but I get dead tired of the damn eternal item grind.
          • EQ actually has a sanctioned casino ... you buy tokens with your platinum (currency), and turn in tokens for a roll at prizes. There are different casino games for each class. You can win minor prizes like fireworks, food, and more tokens to play with. The big prize is a 'Golden Ticket', which you then turn in for a random prize (which includes rare-ass uber items that were nerfed or don't drop anymore, super fast mounts, etc.) Its a good money sink on the economy, EQ needs it :)
  • by HeavyDevelopment ( 1117531 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:43AM (#19996517)
    So if logic follows regarding gambling, Linden $ and real world money in Second Life, would virtual sex in Second Life for Linden $ be prostitution?
  • are easy to fix so only the people that you want can win.
  • Win Win Lose Lose (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DuBois ( 105200 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:49AM (#19996585) Homepage
    Prohibitions against gambling work just as well as prohibitions against alcohol and other mind-altering substances. i.e. not at all, in either the real world or a virtual one. It's a losing battle, and Linden Labs will eventually lose this one.

    I'd suspect that Linden is under some pressure from some government somewhere, and that's the real reason they're doing this.

    There will always be people willing to trade their hard-earned Linden dollars for the thrill of possibly winning a lot more from someone else, no matter how long the odds. Those people will now take their money elsewhere, to the detriment of Linden Labs and all the denizens of Second Life.
  • by OglinTatas ( 710589 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @10:50AM (#19996595)
    Blizzard no longer allows you to roll for epic drops in WoW... duel flags are immediately set for all players clicking "need"
  • Can't people now set up their own SL servers with their own rules?
  • Disclaimer: I'm not a 2nd-lifer or into these kinds of things, so I may be talking out of my ass, but I was wondering...

    Where does Jurisdiction lie in a virtual world who's only physical manifestation lies in a bunch of web servers spread all over the world?
    • Jurisdiction lies with the company/person that runs the virtual world. And as long as they have an employee in the US, the US will bitch slap that employee from what I understand.
  • Hi, My name is Frosty. I'm a real person with a real "life". what is this "Second Life"?
  • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @11:29AM (#19997183)
    It's a benign one, but in the end, you have no rights. They can do anything they want to you without notice at any time and your only option is to stop participating.
  • by HMKAI ( 924435 )
    From the article:

    "The large chunk of users that enjoyed using in-world casinos and betting Linden Dollars on events both inside and outside the game world will now have nothing left to do."

    This assumes that those users are ONLY into casinos. There is plenty left to do other than gambling. Yes, obviously some people will pack up and go away, but others will simply find new ways to amuse themselves in-world. After all, lots of these same people have significant emotional investment in their in-world p
  • There's still the thriving BDSM community around which they can prop up their business. Look for an increase of leather-bound furry avatars in the near future.
  • It's clear that all gambling does is facilitates terrorist organizations and funds their causes. Every terrorist I know spends time on taking money away from hardworking people of the world in order to build the BOMB. Now we should be vigilant to fight not only real, but also virtual terrorism.
  • Since Second Life is a game...and its virtual currency is bought using real currency...and you can gain and lose money by "playing" this game...isn't all of Second Life considered gambling? Shouldn't they just shut down completely?

    I know I am stretching it but I am dreaming of a time where I don't see a Second Life article on Slashdot for a whole week.
  • by HMKAI ( 924435 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @01:51PM (#19999609) Homepage
    Also, another mistake in the article is that all gambling is banned.

    In fact, only specific types of wagering is banned.

    From the Blog:
    It is a violation of this policy to wager in games in the Second Life (R) environment operated on Linden Lab servers if such games:

    (1) (a) rely on chance or random number generation to determine a winner, OR (b) rely on the outcome of real-life organized sporting events,


    (2) provide a payout in

    (a) Linden Dollars, OR
    (b) any real-world currency or thing of value.

    I don't bring this up to split hairs, only to point out that personal contests seem to still be allowed. It seems reasonable, based upon the above, that one could wager on games where the participants compete directly with each other, such as races, tic-tac-toe and so on.

    Also, the ban seems to be specific to sporting events, wagers on other events still seem acceptable (elections, the Dow Jones, weather patterns, etc.)

    I'm not a lawyer, and stories of Linden Labs capricious application of their rules exist, and I'm not even sure Linden Labs has to actually be accountable to any legal authority about how it administers its TOS, so in the end you have to wager at your own risk.
  • by kinglink ( 195330 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @02:08PM (#19999929)
    Hey Slashdotters, let's stop applauding Second Life and move on. They arn't the first "real life" simulator, they claim to be the biggest but almost anyone who actually has tried to market a business in Second Life has come to the same conclusion, the numbers that Linden posts (the millions of subscribers) are vastly inflated. The consensus is there's around 40 thousand active users and with this move I'm guessing that might drop to 30 thousand.

    This is just a PR move by Second life to get more attention but instead we should just move on to other stuff. We moved from too many WoW stories to too many Second Life stories, and now we just seem to be stagnating, anyone have an idea for the next "big thing"?
  • by GrnArmadillo ( 697378 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @03:19PM (#20000979)
    Two comments:

    1. Independent of any legal issues, SL players have no way of verifying that the operations of a "casino" are legitimate. I can't imagine why anyone would give in-game currency to a "slot machine" that has almost certainly been programmed to make sure that the house always wins. From this standpoint, banning such activities isn't necessarily a bad thing. (Indeed, games like World of Warcraft that have banned "casinos" have done so because players tend to spam to advertise games which are so stacked against their customers to count as scams, not because they felt that gambling for in-game currency violated federal law.)

    2. Notably, the blog post also declares that there will be NO REIMBURSEMENT for second life "property" removed in order to enforce this policy, much less for devaluation of in-game "land" that used to host a high-traffic casino. I'm half curious whether we're going to see any lawsuits over this, and, in the longer term, whether this will affect peoples' willingness to purchase virtual assets from Linden Labs. I find it remarkable that anyone would willingly purchase "property" that can be rendered valueless at the discretion of the service providers under the terms of service. (Indeed, a court has already ruled against the TOS' arbitration clauses, arguing that they were too one-sided to be enforcible, so perhaps there is an open door to raise just such a challenge here.)

  • by jpatters ( 883 ) on Thursday July 26, 2007 @05:12PM (#20002605)
    I was an operator (with two partners) of a nightclub in SL until a few days ago. We shut down because we just didn't have enough time to put into it, but we were marginally profitable even though we never had gambling of any kind. We decided not to have gambling for two main reasons, first, we considered it unethical, and second, it is obviously illegal being that we are all based in the US. We sold our land to another resident who will be putting in his own nightclub, and I hope for his sake that gambling wasn't part of his business plan. I guess we sold the land at the right time, I expect land prices to take a dive with all the casino operators selling.

    I guess I'm not really sad to see gambling go, but I'd like to see the law changed because it clearly is all about patronage for the big brick and mortar casino interests. Regardless, it is the law and Linden Labs has to obey it if they want to remain in business. Like it or not, that's a fact.