interressant
Bwin calls for « modern regulation » after German court victory
Bwin chief executive Norbert Teufelberger has called for Germany to develop “modern regulations for online gaming” after Germany’s highest civil court ruled that lottery operator Westlotto could not be granted injunctions against Bwin offering services in the territory.
Earlier today, the Federal Supreme Court found in favour of Bwin following a six-year battle that ensued after monopoly operator the West German Lottery Company (« Westlotto ») applied in 2004 for an injunction preventing Bwin from offering and advertising sports betting, casino and lottery products in Germany. Today’s decision followed an appeal by Bwin against two rulings in favour of Westlotto by the Regional Court of Cologne.
Teufelberger (pictured) said: “It is high time, and in the interests of all those involved, to prepare the way for the modern regulation of online gaming in Germany. We are optimistic that Germany will follow the example of other European states like Italy and France. Like the United Kingdom, both these states have regulated the opening-up of their markets in such a way as to take into account both market circumstances and the need for gamer protection and combating fraud.”
Germany’s ban prohibiting all organisation or intermediation of public games of chance on the internet came into force on 1 January 2008 upon passage of the German State Gambling Treaty, which is due to expire on 1 January 2012. It came under challenge late last year when one of the 16 Lander signed into the treaty, Schleswig-Holstein, demanded its cancellation and replacement with an intrastate licensing system.
While the ECJ ruled earlier this year in cases including Carmen Media, Happybet Sportwetten, Digibet that monopolistic restrictions could not be justified under EU law due to the extent of advertising and promotion being undertaken by German lottery companies, it still upheld the view that monopolies were the most sensible vehicle by which the supply of gambling offerings could be controlled and social responsibility issues correspondingly addressed.
Bwin’s statement however went on to argue that the fact “that 95% of gaming revenues in Germany are generated by unregulated providers” meant the State Treaty must be regarded as a failure.
“The treaty justifies the state monopoly by claiming that ‘gaming addiction is a danger to the general public and only the state (offline) monopoly is capable of channelling people’s natural gambling urges.’ However, the objective of effectively preventing gaming addiction can be achieved only by a licensing model in which the granting of licences is linked to compliance with suitable standards of gambler protection."
Teufelberger added: « We shall continue to constructively support the positive regulation of online gaming, contributing the extensive know-how that we have acquired, not least as a licensed provider in newly regulated markets like Italy and France. »