The California Senate has altered the language of Assembly Bill 831, a proposal that initially aimed to outlaw both online sweepstakes casinos and sweepstakes conducted by for-profit commercial entities in the Golden State.
California Assembly Bill 831 Does Not Affect State Lottery Games
Lawmakers clarified this week that AB 831 will not affect state lottery games or traditional sweepstakes promotions.
The revised version addresses concerns that the legislation could criminalize sweepstakes promotions offered by retailers such as McDonald’s and Starbucks.
The updated language states: “(a) It is unlawful for any person or entity to operate, conduct, or offer an online sweepstakes game in this state.”
AB 831 also reads: “(b) It is unlawful for any entity, financial institution, payment processor, geolocation provider, gaming content supplier, platform provider, or media affiliate to knowingly and willfully support directly or indirectly the operation, conduct, or promotion of an online sweepstakes game within this state.”
Wording Has Been Tweaked
In addition, the bill’s wording received a few tweaks, like “gambling-themed games” being changed to “gambling,” “casino-style table games” now reads “table games,” and the words “and willfully” were attached after “knowingly.”
The measure also states: “The bill would specify that these provisions do not make unlawful game promotions or sweepstakes conducted by for-profit commercial entities on a limited and occasional basis as an advertising and marketing tool that are incidental to substantial bona fide sales of consumer products or services and that are not intended to provide a vehicle for the establishment of ongoing gambling or gaming.”
Sports betting attorney Daniel Wallach said the updated language should clear up any confusion.
“This language addresses the false contentions that AB 831 would outlaw traditional sweepstakes promotions like those offered by Marriott, Microsoft and Starbucks, as well as the California Lottery’s ‘2nd Chance Program’ online games,” he wrote in a post on X.
He continued: “Both of those arguments were specious. The Starbucks-type promotions were already protected by Section 17539.1’s existing ‘limited and occasional’ language. And state lottery games could not be criminalized since they are specifically authorized by the CA Constitution and CA law.”
New Section 1 Added To Bill
The amended bill also introduces a new Section 1 that specifies the bill is aimed at those who “knowingly and willfully” engage in or promote online sweepstakes games that use a dual-currency system.
The following definitions were added:
(1) Direct consideration “means a coin, token, or other representation of value that may be purchased by a player or received through a bonus or promotion and that is used for playing or participating in a sweepstakes game.”
(2) Indirect consideration “means a coin, token, or other representation of value that may be exchanged for a prize, award, cash, or cash equivalents or a chance to win a prize, award, cash, or cash equivalents. Indirect consideration is provided for free through a promotion, bonus, or with the purchase of a related product, service, or activity. As used in this paragraph, ‘related product, service, or activity’ includes a coin, token, or other representation of value that may be used for direct consideration.”
(3) Sweepstakes “means a procedure, activity, or event, for the distribution, donation, or sale of anything of value by lot, chance, predetermined selection, or random selection that is not unlawful under other provisions of law, including, but not limited to, Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 319) and Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 330) of Title 9 of Part 1 of the Penal Code.”