Lessig’s keynote address at the recent Global Interactive Gaming Summit & Expo (GIGSE) was the talk of the show. Lessig discussed how online gambling has thrived because it works on the premise of privacy and anonymity. You can really be just about anyone you want to be online, with only IP address tracking to give others a sense of where you are physically located.

Your true identity and identifying characteristics are completely unknown if you choose not to share them. You share such information with your sports book, but the information loop closes at that point.

Lessig’s argument is that the anonymous lifestyle, with protected private relationships, could be in danger in the near future. He believes we aren’t too far away from a potential “9/11-type” event which would change everything.

Lessig points out that Internet viruses and related annoyances have been extremely benign in most cases. Identity theft is a huge hassle, but he crime perpetrated doesn’t physically cause any damage. What Lessig is worried about is something more sinister.

The bigger worry is the salad days of relatively harmless threats online could end. Lessig’s thinking is that it wouldn’t be hard for some very malicious bugs to start surfacing and wreaking true havoc on the world’s economy.

All it would take is for one of these online bugs to send out a few commands which could quietly erase the entire contents of a hard drive or render a computer’s mother board useless.

With such a disaster, the world economy could come to a standstill. Banks and governments would be scrambling to keep networks operating and financial transactions moving. Millions would face burdens unthinkable in a time of peace. When such an event occurs, the calls for the end of privacy on the Internet will find willing ears.

In an identity card system, users would have to give their home residence, among other items. Governments worldwide would allow online gambling to be conducted in a regulated method. However, such methods would allow every jurisdiction to dictate the terms of participation for its citizens.

The U.S. would likely allow all states to choose if residents can participate. Chances are, the vast majority would only allow very limited options in order to fill government coffers.

The loss of personal privacy could lead to some discriminatory actions against gamblers as well. Tools tracking what you do online would have a field day with such a system. Imagine if the NBA found out you were betting basketball online? The league might decide to bar you from viewing their statistics.

Court rulings have given sports leagues control over the distribution of league data. It isn’t stretching the imagination that they could tell all partners who use league data they must bar “undesirables” from viewing it.

Technology would provide alternatives. One observer mentioned the likelihood of a black market for fake IDs if such a plan was to go forward. We all could be U.K. residents if such a thing existed.

Still, an online world ruled by identity cards is a chilling thought. The system we have now is not really broken, except in the eyes of those who don’t want us to gamble at all. Would we really be subject to something that allows others to tell us how to live our lives?

Most professionals who heard Lessig don’t believe it would happen, but it does make for some very interesting discussion points.

Lessig’s final point was for the industry to be proactive. Make this topic a matter of personal choices. Don’t leave things to chance because, if we all don’t act now, something will happen and others will act for us.

June 8, 2006