defined as: Any gambling game offered through the use of communications technology that allows a person, utilizing money, checks, electronic transfers of money, credit cards or any other instrumentality to transmit electronic information to assist in the placement of a bet or wager and corresponding information related to the display of the game, game outcomes or other similar information. The term shall not include: (1) A lottery game or Internet instant game as def ined in . . . the . . . Lottery Law. (2) iLottery under Chapter 5 (relating to lottery). …9 Neither the law nor the applicable regulations defined “simulate” or “casino-style” in the context of the 2017 Act,10 and thus Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court was called upon to determine whether the Pennsylvania Lottery’s iLottery games were prohibited “simulated casino-style” games. After a five-day trial, including several witnesses from the lottery and gaming industries, the Court held in favor of the Pennsylvania Lottery, dismissing the complaint of the licensed slot machine operators and denying their claims for relief. The Court stated (emphasis in original): Reading the respective restrictions in [the lottery law and the gaming law], the legislature intended that the Lottery and casinos expand their offerings and games into the digital space and for the two offerings to co-exist and, importantly, to be successful. … However, the legislature’s decision to prohibit the Lottery from simulating “casino-style” slot machines does not reflect an intention to preclude the Lottery from using features or characteristics that are not particular to a casino slot machine. Features not particular to a casino slot machine include those that are generally present or used in digital gaming and media, in social or casual games, or in games beyond those offered by casinos (like traditional lottery products). To hold that the use and/or presence of features in slot machines, whether land-based or online, makes those features “casinostyle” and subject to their exclusive use by casinos, would unreasonably restrict the Lottery’s ability to use modern and popular technology and game features that have their origins outside the casino industry in its iLottery games. Conversely, it would be unreasonable to preclude the casinos’ use of the same features in slot machines simply because they may also be used in iLottery games. The Court presumes the legislature did not intend such an absurd result.11 The Court further determined that: - “Casino-style” is defined as features that are particular to slot machines and not features that are generally present or used in digital gaming, in PGRI Sept Ad V7.2.1_4PRINT_082523.ai 2 8/25/2023 5:40:24 PM
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTg4MTM=