Crypto Attorney Argues Prediction Markets Are Not Gambling
As certain regions impose bans on Polymarket for being perceived as a gambling site, attorney Aaron Brogan makes a case against this classification.
Key Points:
- Jurisdictions such as Singapore, Thailand, and Taiwan have banned Polymarket, labeling it a gambling platform.
- Critics agree that prediction markets are valuable, especially in scenarios like elections, but challenge their classification when it comes to sports predictions.
In light of the current bans, Brogan argues that prediction markets are not akin to gambling platforms, stating:
“If you are a state-licensed gambling product, then you are taking one side of the bet. You’re essentially betting against your users.” (Translation: “Si usted es un producto de juego con licencia estatal, entonces está apostando en contra de sus usuarios.”)
He explains that platforms like Polymarket serve as neutral middlemen enabling trades without taking bets themselves, focusing instead on transaction fees.
Brogan further argues that these markets help hedge risks and provide a vital understanding tool, differentiating them fundamentally from gambling operations.
Notably, obtaining an online gambling license in the U.S. demands significant effort, leading to questions why established entities like Draft Kings do not target prediction markets at the state level, given their regulatory distinctions.
“Federal law in the United States preempts state law,” Brogan clarifies, referencing how registered prediction markets operate under federal regulations, which supersede state laws.
In a competitive landscape, Kalshi is among those seeking the regulatory green light to enter the space with confidence as they continue to expand their offerings.
