Blocking measures against offshore online gambling: a scoping review

Figures & data

Table 1. Reviewed databases.

Database	Search setting	Date of search	Hits
Google Scholar	Default	2021-10-01	48 500
Scopus	Default	2021-10-01	22
Proquest	Default (include: book, article, dissertation, report, working paper, book chapter)	2022-04-05	97 738
Ebscohost	Default (include: academic articles, ebooks, & reports)	2022-04-05	23

Figure 1. Prisma flow chart. (According to Moher et al., 2009).

Table 2. Included studies.

Article	Data/method	Context	Category
Dewar (2001). Regulating internet gambling: The net tightens on online casinos and bookmakers. Aslib Proceedings, 53(9), 353–367.	Internet search & key informant interviews	AUS, UK, US	country case study
Dhillon et al. (2021). Online Gambling in Malaysia: A Legal Analysis. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 29(1), 207–220.	qualitative doctrinal analysis of journal/news articles & Malaysian legislation	Malaysia	legal analysis
Fiedler (2020). Frankreich. In: I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante & M. von Meduna (eds.) Regulierung von Onlineglücksspielen. (pp. 261–329). Springer.	Internet search & key informant interviews	France	country case study
Fiedler, Steinmetz, and von Meduna (2020). Deutschland. In: I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante & M. von Meduna (eds.) Regulierung von Onlineglücksspielen. (pp. 111–230). Springer.	Internet search & key informant interviews	Germany	country case study
French et al. (2021). A Governmentality of Online Gambling: Quebec’s Contested Internet Gambling Website Blocking Provisions. Canadian Journal of Law and Society/La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société, 36(3), 483–504.	Situational analysis of key documents	Quebec/Canada	political analysis
Grahmann (2008). Betting on Prohibition: The Federal Government’s Approach to Internet Gambling. Nw. J. Tech. & Intell. Prop., 7, 162–184.	legal texts/laws/constitution	US	legal analysis
Hudelcu’s (2021). Interference Of The Legitimate Public And Private Interest In Exercising The Competences Of The National Office Of Gambling. Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, 10(1), 79–88.	legal texts/laws/constitution	Romania	legal analysis
Schmidt-Kessen et al. (2019). Preventing risks from illegal online gambling using effective legal design on landing pages. J. Open Access L., 7, 1–22.	Qualitative analysis of landing pages	Europe	effectiveness and implementation analysis
Steinmetz and Ante (2020). Norwegen. In: I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante & M. von Meduna (eds.) Regulierung von Onlineglücksspielen. (pp. 450–487). Springer.	Internet search & key informant interviews	Norway	country case study
Steinmetz, Ante, et al. (2020). Dänemark. In: I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante & M. von Meduna (eds.) Regulierung von Onlineglücksspielen. (pp. 74–109). Springer.	Internet search & key informant interviews	Denmark	country case study
Steinmetz, von Meduna, et al. (2020). Spanien. In: I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante & M. von Meduna (eds.) Regulierung von Onlineglücksspielen. (pp. 490–526). Springer.	Internet search & key informant interviews	Spain	country case study
Thoma and Fiedler (2020). Italien. In: I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante & M. von Meduna (eds.) Regulierung von Onlineglücksspielen. (pp. 395–447). Springer.	Internet search & key informant interviews	Italy	country case study
Ververis et al. (2017). Internet censorship capabilities in Cyprus: An investigation of online gambling blocklisting. In: International Conference on e-Democracy (pp. 136–149). Springer.	measurement of end-user connections	Cyprus	effectiveness and implementation analysis
Ververis et al. (2015). Understanding internet censorship policy: The case of greece. In 5th USENIX Workshop on Free and Open Communications on the Internet (FOCI 15). (pp. 1–11.). https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/foci15/foci15-paper-ververis-updated-2.pdf (Accessed: 2022-05-17).	Internet Service Provider (ISP) data & ‘Ooniprobe’ software	Greece	effectiveness and implementation analysis

Table 3. Main results of reviewed literature.

Article	Implementation	Effectiveness	Risks	Alternatives
Dewar (2001)	content filtering gambling-related keywords	never 100% circumvention by skilled users		liability of intermediaries (ISPs and payment providers)
Dhillon et al. (2021)	Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission can request website and advertising blocking	reduced due to flexibility of offshore providers		liability of intermediaries (software providers)
Fiedler (2020)	court decision for website blocking order French National Gambling Authority ARJEL can initiate payment block	depends on willingness & competence to use blocking depends on straightforward processes
Fiedler, Steinmetz, and von Meduna (2020)		depends on adequate resources
French et al. (2021)	ISP obligated to block within 30 days		privacy, data protection and censorship
Grahmann (2008)	details of payment blocking left to Federal Reserve System	increases by using combination of measures	privacy, data protection and censorship freedom of trade	use of broad definitions
Hudelcu’s (2021)			privacy, data protection and censorship freedom of trade
Schmidt-Kessen et al. (2019)	IP-address blocking DNS-blocking URL-blocking with deep-package inspection	combination with well-designed landing pages	privacy, data protection and censorship
Steinmetz and Ante (2020)			privacy, data protection and censorship
Steinmetz, Ante, et al. (2020)	automated search engines for offshore gambling sites	depends on willingness & competence to use blocking		use of white list and labels for official gambling companies
Steinmetz, von Meduna, et al. (2020)				use of white list and labels for official gambling companies
Thoma & Fiedler (2020)	use of blocklist
Ververis et al. (2017)	URL-blocking with deep-package inspection blocklist as text file with complete file paths	outdated landing pages multiple sites from blocklist not blocked deficient block list	privacy, data protection and censorship freedom of trade
Ververis et al. (2015)	manually updated blocklist only in pdf-format	unspecific blocking response multiple sites from blocklist not blocked deficient blocklist	privacy, data protection and censorship freedom of trade

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). The PRISMA group. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dewar, L. (2001). Regulating internet gambling: The net tightens on online casinos and bookmakers. Aslib Journal of Information Management in 2014, 53(9), 353–367.

 Google Scholar

Dhillon, G., Ling, L. S., Nandan, M., & Nathan, J. T. X. (2021). Online gambling in Malaysia: A legal analysis. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 29(1), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.1.12

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fiedler, I. (2020). Frankreich. In I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante, & M. von Meduna (Eds.), Regulierung von onlineglücksspielen (pp. 261–329). Springer.

 Google Scholar

Fiedler, I., Steinmetz, F., & von Meduna, M. (2020). Deutschland. In I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante, & M. von Meduna (Eds.), Regulierung von onlineglücksspielen (pp. 111–230). Springer.

 Google Scholar

French, M., Tardif, D., Kairouz, S., & Savard, A. C. (2021). A governmentality of online gambling: Quebec’s contested internet gambling website blocking provisions. Canadian Journal of Law and Society/La Revue Canadienne Droit Et Société, 36(3), 483–504. https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.9

 Google Scholar

Grahmann, K. P. (2008). Betting on prohibition: The federal government’s approach to internet gambling. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 7(2), 162–184.

 Google Scholar

Hudelcu, D. (2021). Interference of the legitimate public and private interest in exercising the competences of the national office of gambling. Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, 10(1), 79–88.

 Google Scholar

Schmidt-Kessen, M. J., Hörnle, J., & Littler, A. (2019). Preventing risks from illegal online gambling using effective legal design on landing pages. Journal of Open Access List, 7(2019), 1–22.

 Google Scholar

Steinmetz, F., & Ante, L. (2020). Norwegen. In I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante, & M. von Meduna (Eds.), Regulierung von onlineglücksspielen (pp. 450–487). Springer.

 Google Scholar

Steinmetz, F., Ante, L., & von Meduna, M. (2020). Dänemark. In I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante, & M. von Meduna (Eds.), Regulierung von onlineglücksspielen (pp. 74–109). Springer.

 Google Scholar

Steinmetz, F., von Meduna, M., & Ante, L. (2020). Spanien. In I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante, & M. von Meduna (Eds.), Regulierung von onlineglücksspielen (pp. 490–526). Springer.

 Google Scholar

Thoma, G., & Fiedler, I. (2020). Italien. In I. Fiedler, F. Steinmetz, L. Ante, & M. von Meduna (Eds.), Regulierung von onlineglücksspielen (pp. 395–447). Springer.

 Google Scholar

Ververis, V., Isaakidis, M., Loizidou, C., & Fabian, B. (2017). Internet censorship capabilities in Cyprus: An investigation of online gambling blocklisting. In: International Conference on e-Democracy, Athens, Greece. (pp. 136–149). Springer.

 Google Scholar

Ververis, V., Kargiotakis, G., Filastò, A., Fabian, B., & Alexandros, A. (2015). Understanding internet censorship policy: The case of greece. In 5th USENIX Workshop on Free and Open Communications on the Internet (FOCI 15). (pp. 1–11). Retrieved May 17, 2022, https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/foci15/foci15-paper-ververis-updated-2.pdf.

 Google Scholar