| |
BGonline.org Forums
Bad news from Belgium
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: Bad news from Belgium (capecodbob63)
Date: Saturday, 9 October 2010, at 1:28 a.m.
There are too many paraphrases of the story of the Oregon court case on the net already. Here's a link to what appears to be a faithful reproduction of the original story:
http://www.edcollins.com/backgammon/backgamb.htm
(1) Bob's retelling in this forum is the first time I've ever heard that the Oregon state court case deciding a question of Oregon state law had any "national impact" whatsoever. Cite, please.
(2) Note that the Games Magazine text is incorrect with regard to "as the Alabama Supreme Court had done in 1976" -- that decision was in 1876. Full text here:
https://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddhqm87s_133d864npck
(3) And if someone actually had a case number and a cite to the Oregon decision in a legal reference ....
(4) And to the 1978 New Jersey decision that decided backgammon was a gambling game. See this page:
quoting from Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, Fall, 2006, "Poker Flops under New York Law," by Bennett M. Liebman:
"...Case law from New Jersey also supports the proposition that the dominating element test no longer applies in New York. New Jersey in 1978 amended its criminal laws to establish a Code of Criminal Justice based largely on the Model Penal Code...In the case of Boardwalk Regency Corp. v. Attorney General of New Jersey, a New Jersey court was called on to determine the meaning of a contest of chance....The Boardwalk Regency Casino sought a declaratory judgment asking that its proposed backgammon tournament be held to be proper as a non-gambling activity. n108 The casino argued that backgammon was a game of skill. The court acknowledged "that backgammon, played on its highest level, can and does involve complex strategies and maneuvers incorporating sophisticated theories of mathematics and statistics which at least some highly intelligent players are able to utilize." It found, however, that "the proper focus of the inquiry here is not on the level of skill which may affect the outcome of the contested activity but rather on whether the element of chance is a factor that is material to the final result." Viewing the evidence in its totality, including the evidence submitted by the casino's witnesses, the court came to the conclusion that the use of dice in backgammon "removes all doubt from this court that the element of chance plays at least a material role in determining the outcome of this activity on which money is risked, no matter how much it is claimed that the role of skill predominated." In short, the court ruled, using the same law that governs in New York, that backgammon was a gambling game..."
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.