赌博律师对负责任赌博的看法

S. Planzer, Martin Lyčka
{"title":"赌博律师对负责任赌博的看法","authors":"S. Planzer, Martin Lyčka","doi":"10.1093/med-psych/9780190074562.003.0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From the backgrounds of an external counsel and an in-house lawyer, this chapter offers a legal perspective on responsible gambling (RG). The primary tool of lawyers is law and not empirical sciences. Accordingly, these legal scholars explain how their normative perspective differs from other scholarly perspectives and how it affects the concept, theory, and objectives of RG. These stakeholders describe aspects that hamper the effectiveness of RG policies, such as hidden agendas and RG rules that are not empirically based. They then revisit the Reno Model, comparing its strengths and weaknesses; they observe alternative models of regulatory practice. The analytical exercise feeds into discussions of the legal and practical implications of the RG rules, in particular as regards the scope of duty of care and the compliance burden of regulated gambling operators. The authors make suggestions on how to improve RG programs and the Reno Model itself, using insights from behavioral studies and promoting bottom up-initiatives.","PeriodicalId":384629,"journal":{"name":"Responsible Gambling","volume":"122 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Gambling Lawyers’ Perspective on Responsible Gambling\",\"authors\":\"S. Planzer, Martin Lyčka\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/med-psych/9780190074562.003.0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"From the backgrounds of an external counsel and an in-house lawyer, this chapter offers a legal perspective on responsible gambling (RG). The primary tool of lawyers is law and not empirical sciences. Accordingly, these legal scholars explain how their normative perspective differs from other scholarly perspectives and how it affects the concept, theory, and objectives of RG. These stakeholders describe aspects that hamper the effectiveness of RG policies, such as hidden agendas and RG rules that are not empirically based. They then revisit the Reno Model, comparing its strengths and weaknesses; they observe alternative models of regulatory practice. The analytical exercise feeds into discussions of the legal and practical implications of the RG rules, in particular as regards the scope of duty of care and the compliance burden of regulated gambling operators. The authors make suggestions on how to improve RG programs and the Reno Model itself, using insights from behavioral studies and promoting bottom up-initiatives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":384629,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Responsible Gambling\",\"volume\":\"122 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Responsible Gambling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/med-psych/9780190074562.003.0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Responsible Gambling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/med-psych/9780190074562.003.0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从外部法律顾问和内部律师的背景,本章提供了负责任赌博(RG)的法律视角。律师的主要工具是法律,而不是经验科学。因此,这些法律学者解释了他们的规范性观点与其他学术观点的不同之处,以及它如何影响RG的概念、理论和目标。这些利益相关者描述了阻碍RG政策有效性的方面,例如隐藏的议程和没有经验基础的RG规则。然后,他们重新审视雷诺模型,比较其优缺点;他们观察监管实践的另类模式。分析工作有助于讨论赌博规则的法律和实际影响,特别是关于注意义务的范围和受管制的赌博经营者的合规负担。作者对如何改进RG项目和里诺模型本身提出了建议,利用行为研究的见解和促进自下而上的倡议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Gambling Lawyers’ Perspective on Responsible Gambling
From the backgrounds of an external counsel and an in-house lawyer, this chapter offers a legal perspective on responsible gambling (RG). The primary tool of lawyers is law and not empirical sciences. Accordingly, these legal scholars explain how their normative perspective differs from other scholarly perspectives and how it affects the concept, theory, and objectives of RG. These stakeholders describe aspects that hamper the effectiveness of RG policies, such as hidden agendas and RG rules that are not empirically based. They then revisit the Reno Model, comparing its strengths and weaknesses; they observe alternative models of regulatory practice. The analytical exercise feeds into discussions of the legal and practical implications of the RG rules, in particular as regards the scope of duty of care and the compliance burden of regulated gambling operators. The authors make suggestions on how to improve RG programs and the Reno Model itself, using insights from behavioral studies and promoting bottom up-initiatives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信