Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    The Buzz's Avatar
    The Buzz is online now GPWA Gossip Hound
    Join Date
    February 2007
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    3,853
    Thanks
    346
    Thanked 1,632 Times in 990 Posts

    Default Gambling Commission says GDPR is "no excuse" for non-compliance

    The UK Gambling Commission published an eight-page report this week regarding gambling regulation and the pending General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The regulator acknowledged that some operators have concerns that GDPR, which kicks in 25 May, will hamper their ability to meet their licensing duties. However, it said it would "not accept licensees simply stating that GDPR means that they are unable to comply with an aspect of gambling regulation".

    From the report:

    "We take the view that GDPR is not intended to prevent operators from taking steps which are necessary in the public interest, or are necessary to comply with regulatory requirements under a gambling licence.

    GDPR should not be improperly used as an excuse to avoid taking steps which enable compliance with licence conditions, promote socially responsible gambling, and promote the licensing objectives.

    Where licensees have genuine well-founded concerns about GDPR, we are committed to working with industry to get the right outcome – one that safeguards personal data whilst also promoting the licensing objectives."
    The Commission added that gambling operators should retain customer data for at least five years after their relationship with those customers ends where the data "relates in any way to regulatory compliance" and they should be prepared to provide the regulator with a copy of their data retention policies and that it could also ask the companies to disclose customer data to check their compliance with their licensing obligations.

    "Where data which is relevant to a licensee’s compliance with the regulatory regime has been obtained, licensees should have regard to the fact that we may wish to investigate whether a licensee has complied with their obligations," the Commission said. "In some cases (for instance, where we are investigating a licensee’s compliance with its social responsibility and anti-money laundering requirements as a result of a gambler stealing funds for gambling over a prolonged period of time), this may involve requesting account data which goes back a substantial period."
    Gambling law expert Diane Mullenex of Pinsent Masons, told Out-Law.com:

    "The Commission’s note is further evidence that the regulator is again seeking to push its stance of seeking to protect the customer. It should be hoped that all professional operators will be well advanced in their GDPR preparations and the Commission’s position set out in the note should not come as a surprise to any in the industry."
    Read the entire report here:http://live-gamblecom.cloud.contensi...n-and-GDPR.pdf

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to The Buzz For This Useful Post:

    Cash Bonus (11 April 2018), nirmeister (17 April 2018), Renee (12 April 2018)

  3. #2
    matthewt's Avatar
    matthewt is offline On Vacation
    Join Date
    July 2006
    Location
    US
    Posts
    526
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    1,003
    Thanked 140 Times in 111 Posts

    Default

    Well, I bet there will be some licencees who will use the GDPR excuse and let the Commision know. Then the commission will come up with a way to help, right?



    Only time will tell.

    Some licencees will come up with a valid reason, to avoid bringing in lawyers. I would hope.


  4. #3
    Triple7 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2015
    Posts
    2,877
    Thanks
    2,065
    Thanked 2,466 Times in 1,337 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewt View Post
    Well, I bet there will be some licencees who will use the GDPR excuse and let the Commision know. Then the commission will come up with a way to help, right?



    Only time will tell.

    I can't wait to see some court cases. That would be interesting. I would say privacy > gambling license requirements in case of same amount of interests on both sides.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •