In spring 2007, the EU Commission issued an opinion against Germany in which it determined that the prohibition on the online operation and brokerage of gaming was not compatible with the freedom of services guarantee provided for under Article 49 of the EC-Treaty.

An issue that comes up consequently is online gambling, which could also be prevented by cutting off the communication and economic channels used. This is particularly concerning online services offered by foreign providers, including those outside Europe. Online companies based abroad need to communicate over the Internet to stay in touch with the players.

Creating a legally sound monopoly would mean that it would be possible to use administrative, civil and criminal law to prevent illegal providers from marketing, operating or distributing their illegal services on the market countrywide.

Aside from the general legal considerations regarding the lack of necessity of the proposed general prohibition on online gaming, there are also considerable technical factors that would hinder local restrictions of online services in Germany, namely: a) decentralized structure of the Internet; and, b) technical inability    for the gaming operator to localize the exact location of the user.

In the latest court decisions of German States, this second aspect is central to the court's reasoning. In May 2007, the Bavarian Administrative Court of Appeal has determined that a prohibition of the Internet service for players from the federal state of Bavaria was illegitimate because the prohibition was not technically enforceable and would therefore be impossible for the sports betting provider (and addressee of the prohibition order).

However, severe critic has not yet driven the majority of German federal state authorities to consider a revision of the State Treaty on Gambling. If the Draft comes into force without amendment, it will immediately be subject to legal challenges from the Commission and private operators before national and European courts.

Evidently, it is absolutely impossible for providers from other countries in the EU to take account of the particular conditions in each individual German federal state and to implement various local restrictions in their Internet services.

In any case, the following must be taken into consideration: EU bookmakers are subject to strict and comprehensive supervision in their countries of origin (Austria gives obvious examples for that), so that a proper execution of their offered services is guaranteed, with regard to the protection of players and the prevention of gambling addiction.

The disputes between the USA and several WTO-countries (including the EU) are a striking example of the unpredictable consequences that occur if online gambling ban is insisted upon in spite of all warnings: As a result of impeding access by foreign Internet gambling providers, the USA now faces claims from Antigua and Barbuda to the amount of US $3.4 billion.

Just a ban on online gambling could be an easy thing, but along with the threat of monetary sanctions it turns into a completely different story.

Further developments will be eagerly awaited. It recently became known that the claims brought of the new Internet gambling prohibition by the EU against the USA, could be much higher than the WTO-claims brought by the Caribbean States. And, compared to Antigua and Barbuda, a far greater number of online gaming operators licensed in the EU are now affected by the US-ban.