After Court Ruling, Future Unclear for Video Sweepstakes

As of Friday, February 8, 2013

A video sweepstakes parlor in Robbins will likely have to close following a ruling earlier this week in Davidson County Superior Court.

A judge there dismissed a lawsuit seeking to keep the state from enforcing its ban on Internet sweepstakes businesses. The suit contended new games aren't covered by the ban.

The shop in Robbins, at one end of a strip mall where Just$ave replaced Lowes Foods, is part of a chain operated by International Internet Technologies, and local business owners that had been operating under a temporary order. That company was seeking a preliminary injunction re-straining authorities from enforcing a sweepstakes ban until a judge could make a ruling about the company's new software.

However, Superior Court Judge Robert Johnson allowed a motion Monday to dismiss a lawsuit that two sweepstakes stakeholders in Davidson County filed last week.

The suit asked for a hold on enforcement until courts could rule on modifications to games to remove the "entertaining displays" barred by a statute recently upheld by the state's high court.

In Robbins, the games no longer show spinning images similar to Vegas-style slot machines, but instead only show amounts on deposit, wagered amounts, and wins or losses.

Players at so-called Internet cafes buy Internet time and either surf the Web or play the sweepstakes. The clock only runs on their Internet time when they are actually on the Web, not when playing. ITT software doesn't show much, mostly a blank screen with a bar across the bottom.

On the left it shows the amount deposited. On the right is a "radio button" labeled Reveal. When clicked, it changes to show amounts won or lost or even.

This type of system is called a "pre-reveal" game, but the state contends the entire matter has already been decided in the recent decision by the Supreme Court of North Carolina when its justices upheld the state ban.

Operators tried to stay in business by changing their software. After the high court's ruling late last year, companies who supply the games to operators changed the games to reveal the prize before a game is played, hence "pre-reveal."

Many operators thought that would be one way around the state's ban. Others expect the General Assembly, seeking more revenue to remedy the state shortfall, will find some way to legalize the games and collect taxes from them.

"Now that North Carolina's ban on video sweepstakes has been upheld in court, the Sheriffs' Association is seeking legal guidance on how soon law enforcement offices can resume enforcement of the law," the association itself said. "The Association is requesting advice from the N.C. Attorney General's Office. We expect an answer soon."

Contact John Chappell at (910) 783-5841 or jfchappell @gmail.com.

More like this story

DoubleHeroides 3 months, 2 weeks ago

What I’ve always found interesting is the support these machines garner here in Moore County especially from the Board of Commissioners. They have the option to remove or zone out these kinds of gaming operations when they were legal but instead they were allowed to pop up all over the place. It isn’t that I personally have a problem with them my main concern is that while these establishments support the vice of gambling our commissioners are staunchly against the vice of alcohol consumption. I recall them all stating about a year ago that while they will support the Bensalem Township’s right to vote to decide if they want liquor sales they personally hope it does not pass.

I don’t understand the value system of our commissioners. Gambling on a Friday night is okay but a nip of bourbon isn’t?

teufelhunden 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Seems seedy and tacky...

Toda 3 months, 2 weeks ago

DoubleHeroides => Good observation. The reason these parlor games have now become a focus of the State after years of local video gaming, is the so called Educational Lottery.

If the State taxed operators or machine owners like a liquor tax, then the State could have another revenue stream. Instead, they want to quash business development which provides jobs for some and entertainment for others.

theunit 3 months, 2 weeks ago

I can't understand what all the fuss is about these internet sweepstakes parlors. The same purest law makers who all of a sudden want to get rid of these businesses are phonies. The fact of the matter is internet sweepstakes parlors have not been a police problem in any county in this state. Wal-Mart and the Huddle Houses present more police issues for local law enforcement than these businesses. I think legislators at the state, county and city levels could make better use of their energy and focus. Let me remind you all that law makers are circling the wagons to fight any federal legislation that might affect our archaic 2nd amendments rights. Yet they posture to continue this fight. What about the right for these local businesses to pursue prosperity whether we agree with them or not? You have to tolerate politics.

Toda 3 months, 2 weeks ago

Unit => stated very clearly ... like I said, it's a matter of tax revenue. Since the General Assembly pasted legislation for the pseudo educational lottery, they don't want any competition.

With respect to the 2nd Amendment, I am more concerned with the right to free enterprise. Small business is the pulse of our nations economy according to politicians; corporations get a pass on taxation by way of the 68 thousand pages of tax code.