Building a European Lobby World Online Gambling Law Report Summer Retreat, June 2003 ULYS Thibault Verbiest

Introduction 1992: European Council in Edinburgh: 13 December 1992 Principle of subsidiarity “Finally, the Commission can say that, following consultations with interested parties, it intends to abandon certain initiatives that had been planned. It will not, for instance, be going ahead with proposals on the harmonization of vehicle number plates or the regulation of gambling ” 2003: expanding online gaming industry  Are the 1992 arguments still valid in an online environment?  Commission press release of 23 December 1992 “as the Community becomes ever more closely integrated, and technological developments open up markets worldwide, it can not be precluded that the Commission will have to reconsider its position in view of new and as yet unforeseeable trends”.

Building a lobby: Legal arguments Standing jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice vs. Gambelli, Ladbrokes? Internal Marketing Strategy for Services  Gambling legislation is identified as a legal barrier  EU citizens should have access to foreign services with the same ease as domestic services (cf. Lindman case) Regulation of the information society:  E-commerce Directive: internal market clause & Review  Notification Directive: EU is taking initiatives in the field of consumer protection, organized crime and money laundering

Building a lobby: Economic impact assessment Just legal arguments will not be sufficient. Commission must be aware of what the online gaming industry represents:  EU based operators:  To what extent do “traditional operators” contribute to charity?  The figures behind the online industry: revenue, employment, clients, etc.  Non-EU based operators:  To what extent is the current land-based legal regime pushing them away?  Consequences: loss of revenue (taxes), consumer protection?  Need for an adequate European framework for online gaming