OK, I am sorry about the time it took for me to reply in this thread. If you look above you will see that I have added 2 new stickies to this forum: "State gambling laws and Poker," and "State gambling laws and the internet." Those 2 posts provide the general framework for looking at State gambling laws and trying to figure out what they mean with respect to Poker and then online poker.
The reason I took so long to respond here is that I wanted to get those two posts finished first.
So anyway, Florida....
First question is always "does the law apply to poker?"
Start with the definition of gambling:
"849.08 Gambling. Whoever plays or engages in any game at cards, keno, roulette, faro or other game of chance, at any place, by any device whatever, for money or other thing of value, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree...."
On its face, I would say this statute does NOT apply to poker because poker is not a "game of chance." The phrase "or other game of chance" modifies the first group of things, at least that is the normal way statutory interpretation is done.
There is a problem here though, and that is the other statutes on the books. First is the "penny ante" games section. That section allows for playing "poker, pinochle, bridge, rummy, canasta, hearts, dominoes, or mah-jongg" at low limits. Since all of these games have at one point or another been considered "games of mostly skill" this provision of law is unnecessary unless these games were also considered by the legislature to be "games of chance" or otherwise covered by the gambling laws. One could argue, however, that the legislature was just being extra protective here, in other words making sure low level games were protected either as games of skill OR as low level games. But then one also has to look at the legislation allowing for poker card rooms and add that to the mix. My best guess is that a Court would look at all these statutes together and conclude the Florida legislature wanted the laws to cover poker whether or not it is a game of skill or chance. I would hope to be wrong, but thats my guess.
So if the Florida gambling law does cover poker, does it cover ONLINE poker?
Point one here is whether the internet is mentioned anywhere in the gambling statutes. And the answer to that is NO.
Point two is that Florida law, at least when applied to the operators of the games, is very place specific: one must operate a "gambling house" (or a lottery or a sportsbook) to be guilty of a gambling felony. And even the misdemeanor player provision refers to "any place." I dont believe the distinction between physical cards and virtual cards will make much difference, its still the same "card game" that is at issue, and the words "by any device" pretty much shut that down.
And given that FL has card rooms - the Commerce Clause challenge is a strong one here.
Putting all these factors together and I think the stronger argument is that the FL legislature has never intended for its gambling laws to apply to the internet and thus a court should rule they do not.
Of course they could pass an internet specific law if they want too.
Skallagrim