The judge reverses the decision. Skill-game ban in Philadelphia
On December 6th, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania rejected a city ordinance in Philadelphia that prohibited the use of so-called skill games at the majority of the city's local establishments.
Video games based in Pennsylvania
The problematic machines, which are similar to slot machines and pay out cash like slot machines, but claim to entail a level of ability that adds to winning, have been opposed for a long time by the owners of casinos in Pennsylvania and the industry as a whole. There are no regulations or taxes imposed on skill games. Additionally, they do not include player protection promises, such as steps to ensure safe gaming habits.
On the other hand, skill-game distributors, operators, and Pace-O-Matic (POM), a company based in Georgia that is responsible for developing the popular game family known as "Pennsylvania Skill," have been successful in obtaining multiple court decisions that have overturned police enforcement seizures of the game.
In March, a ban was passed.
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, this most recent ruling addressed a prohibition on skill games that was approved by the Philadelphia city council in March and signed by the mayor, Cherelle Parker. A challenge was filed against the ban by G&B Amusements, a distributor of skill games, and Harry Sandhu, the proprietor of a nearby petrol station that operates the games. The restriction was upheld by a judge from the common pleas court. Additionally, the judge did not grant a motion for an injunction that would have prevented the ordinance from being enforced.
Patricia A. McCullough, a judge on the Commonwealth Court, referenced a previous ruling that stated that games that are not housed in normal casinos are not subject to the gaming regulations of the state when she ruled in favour of the operators of skill-games. According to what McCullough stated, "at the present time, POM games that are situated outside of regulated facilities are neither illegal nor regulated," as the law currently stands.
A state appeal was filed against the verdict made by the previous court. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has not yet scheduled a hearing as of yet for that particular case. If Philadelphia were to file an appeal against McCullough's decision, the case would be brought before the same court.
The Pace-O-Matic company is happy.
Almost immediately, Pace-O-Matic expressed their approval of the decision. "Pace-O-Matic is pleased, and not surprised, that Commonwealth Court agrees that the ban passed by Philadelphia city council is unlawful," said Mike Barley, a spokesman for the Philadelphia Organisation of Management (POM), in a statement that was published by Play Pennsylvania. The decision to lift it is a victory for small businesses in Philadelphia that rely on the additional cash they earn from customers who play the Pennsylvania Skill games that they run at their establishments. The only thing that this restriction did was inflict harm to businesses who were already having a hard time making ends meet due to the economy.
Meanwhile, the verdict casts doubt on a prohibition that was issued by Bensalem, a suburb of Philadelphia, which is quite similar to the ruling. Parx, the most successful casino in the state, takes up residence in that location. According to the news that was published by Play Pennsylvania, the prohibition has been put on hold until the outcome of the appeals that occur in the other cases.
For years, the industry has been fighting against the rising number of unlicensed skill games that are entering the market. An alliance between the American Gaming Association and the Association of Gaming Equipment Manufacturers has been formed in order to push back against the machines.
In July, casino owners in Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against the state, seeking to have their own tax rate of fifty percent or more on slot earnings declared unconstitutional. They contended that the taxation was unreasonable because skill games are not subject to taxation.
