4 ms·
It might very well be the case. I'm not sure about their motives, I even said so. I don't see how that affects the poorly written definition and the case that p
by TheLogothete 11y ago
It might very well be the case. I'm not sure about their motives, I even said so. I don't see how that affects the poorly written definition and the case that poker and fantasy sports are games of skill.
- akerl_ 11y agoProbably worth checking out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq785nJ0FXQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq785nJ0FXQ The relevant point being that not everybody believes they're a "game of skill" in the "skill vs. chance" slider which is relevant to the law. While there's no question that like every game, user actions (skill) can impact the outcome, how much it can impact the outcome is what determines whether something is classified as a game of skill or chance. Perhaps it's more clear if we say "a game of primarily skill" or "primarily chance". If daily fantasy sports is primarily skill-based, they can do it. If it's primarily chance-based, it's illegal in the US. Which is why they're pushing for it to be referred to as "skill-based".
- dragonwriter 11y agoSome laws use a predominance test; New York law, which seems to be the main focus, does not -- it uses material element of chance standard, which can apply even when a game is primarily skill-based.