A. A regulated entity shall cooperate in good faith with an investigation conducted by the Director, a sports governing body, or a law enforcement agency.
Comment: We suggest removal of the language “a sports governing body.” The operators are not and should not be beholden to sport governing bodies as its regulator. Operators should cooperate in good faith with the Board and relevant law enforcement agencies. Any inquiries arising directly from a sport governing body should be routed and vetted directly through the Director or relevant law enforcement agency as a matter of procedure. To the extent the Director or relevant law enforcement agency must share information with a sport governing body, it should be done in accordance with strict confidentiality and for the limited purpose of integrity monitoring.
2.- 4. above, to the relevant sports governing body and provide written notice of that communication to the Director. With respect to information provided by a permit holder or supplier to a sports governing body, the sports governing body may use such information only for integrity purposes and shall maintain the confidentiality of such information unless disclosure is required by the Director, the sports betting or other law, or a court order; or if the permit holder or supplier consents to disclosure. A sports governing body may make disclosures upon notice to Director and if the Director determines that the disclosures are necessary to allow the sports governing body to conduct and resolve integrity-related investigations.
Comment: Suggest removing “to the relevant sports governing body.” Procedurally, all communication from the operator should go through its regulators, and the regulators should choose what they believe is relevant to share with the sport governing body or bodies. Operators are not beholden to sport governing bodies as regulators. To clarify, this is not a philosophical opposition of information sharing with a sport governing body, but rather an important point of procedure that ensures the sport governmental bodies are not able to usurp governmental or regulatory power.
11VAC5-70-230. Investigations; Reporting.
K. If a sports governing body notifies the Director that real-time information sharing for wagers placed on its sporting events is necessary and desirable, and the Director determines in the Director’s sole discretion that real-time information sharing is necessary, a regulated entity shall share the same information with the sports governing body or its designee with respect to wagers on its sporting events. Such information may be provided in anonymized form and may be used by a sports governing body solely for integrity purposes.
Comment: Same comment as above, and we suggest the same tightening of language to ensure this is not exploited commercially. Agreements between private entities should occur in private contracts, not via public statute or rules.
11VAC5-70-240. Advertising and Marketing.
A. A permit holder shall provide all advertising, marketing, and promotional materials developed by or on behalf of the permit holder by a supplier or vendor to the Director in advance of publication or dissemination for review and approval in accordance with guidelines issued by the Director.
Comment: Suggest that a procedure where each individual piece of marketing material or each individual marketing initiative requires specific approval or pre-approval is overly burdensome for both the operators and the regulator, and is not the industry standard. The submission and subsequent approval or denial of campaign templates on a monthly basis is commonplace in other jurisdictions.
11VAC5-70-290. Player Accounts.
G. A player account may be funded using: 1. A debit card; 2.A credit card; 3. An electronic bank transfer, including a transfer through third parties; 4. An online or mobile payment systems that supports online money transfers; 5. Winnings or payouts; and 6. Any other means approved by the Board.
H. Funds may be withdrawn from a player account through: 1. Wagers; 2. Cashier’s check, wire transfer, or money order by the permit holder made payable to the player and issued directly or delivered to the player’s address on file with the permit holder; 3. Credits to the player’s debit card; 4. Credits to the player’s credit card; 5. Electronic bank transfers, including transfers through third parties; 6. Online or mobile payment systems that support online money transfers; or 7. Any other means approved by the Board.
Comment: In the interest of providing convenient and compliant availability to sports wagering participation in the Commonwealth for all prospective customers and increasing revenue to the state, understanding that the existing rule provides for “other means approved by the Board” for funding and withdrawing from player accounts, we recommend a rule(s) inclusion that permits for on-premise operating activities to facilitate cash account deposits and withdrawals while requiring identity verification/Know Your Customer (“KYC”).
11VAC5-70-290. Player Accounts.
K. Each transaction with respect to a player account between a player and permit holder, except the placement or settlement of a wager, shall be confirmed by e-mail, telephone, text message, or other means agreed upon by the player and permit holder.
Comment: We suggest flexibility in this, as the player could receive too many communications. We suggest the player or operator may have the optionality to choose the types of transactional messages sent or received, though in all cases the operator will have all transactional records available for the player upon request.
11 AC 5-80-20 Sports bettors’ bill of rights
C. A permit holder’s platform site must provide substantial and readily available information to enable players to make informed decisions about their gambling, including:
1. With regard to any sports bet, prominent publication of, at a minimum:
a. The handle of the bet;
b. The odds of winning the bet and the information used to calculate those odds; and
3. The payout amounts and a schedule of payouts.
2. Information on play (e.g., player feedback); and
3. Designated player information or support services regarding play management tools.
Comment: There is not a precedent for this in US jurisdictions and the contract between a player and operator is typically covered in the operator house rules, terms and conditions, and other similar documents. This data represents codifying into regulation the sharing of protected intellectual property that has no bearing on the integrity of an operation. It should be an operator’s choice if it decides to make this type of information publicly available. For example, providing explicit information on how odds may be calculated are highly protected trade secrets that have no bearing on product or operational integrity or a user’s choice to place a bet, and as such should not be a requirement of regulation. Further, displaying the weight of money (the “handle”) on any available bet or wager may also function to affect the integrity of a sporting event if this is widely available public information. We request further clarification on the intent of “information on play” and “designated player information or support services regarding play management tools”, and what may be required over and above industry standard customer service requirements or responsible gaming requirements.
11 VAC 5-80-90 Sports betting platform features
A sports betting platform must possess the following features:
3. Game designs that promote breaks in play and avoidance of excessive play
Comment: Suggest this is highly subjective and difficult to enforce without specific provisions. Suggest removal of this provision, in the context of operators having robust responsible gaming provisions already.
11 VAC 5-80-90 Sports betting platform features
10. Cash transfers and automatic deposits are prohibited or restricted
Comment: What defines automatic deposit? Seeking clarification on what defines “automatic deposit?”
11 AC 5-80-110 Limitations on user accounts
C. A permit holder shall implement and prominently publish procedures to terminate all accounts of any sports bettor who establishes or seeks to establish more than one username or more than one account, whether directly or by use of another individual as proxy. Such procedures may allow a sports bettor who establishes or seeks to establish more than one username or more than one account to retain one account, provided that the permit holder investigates and makes a good faith determination that the sports bettor's conduct was not intended to commit fraud or otherwise evade the requirements of this chapter or regulations thereof.
D. A permit holder shall not allow a sports bettor to use a proxy server for the purpose of misrepresenting his location in order to engage in sports betting.
E. A permit holder shall take commercially and technologically reasonable measures to prevent one sports bettor from acting as a proxy for another. Such measures shall include, without limitation, use of geolocation technologies to prevent simultaneous logins to a single account from geographically inconsistent locations.
Comment: An operator should be provided the right to deduct all activity and refund any deposits if third party account use, proxy use, or other detectable fraud is identified and documented.
11 AC 5-80-120 Protections for at-risk or problem bettors.
A permit holder shall develop and prominently publish procedures for honoring requests made by third parties to exclude or set limits for sports bettors. Such procedures shall include provisions for honoring requests to exclude sports bettors for whom the requester provides documentary evidence of sole or joint financial responsibility for the source of any funds wagered on sports betting on a platform owned by the permit holder, including:
Comment: This language could be interpreted as ambiguous. Seeking clarification on the intent of this section as it implies third-parties may exercise control over accounts that do not belong to them.
VIRGINIA SPORTS BETTORS’ BILL OF RIGHTS
Comment: The sports bettor’s bill of rights implies that regulated operations in other states may not administered fairly in absence of these provisions, which are beyond what is considered industry standard.
Comment: Please see the earlier comment regarding displaying odds and pertinent information regarding wagers, including handle. This is protected IP. Odds made available but the underlying methodologies are protected IP. Prohibition of athletes and team affiliates, including employees, from betting on games, leagues, or sports in which they participate.
Comment: If this is to be feasible, leagues must be required to make this information available to operator at no fee in the interest of integrity.
Kind Regards,
PointsBet USA