Scpccmber 24, 2009 

Via facsirnilc 71 7-652-8018 

c-mail: db@arlantisi ntcmetgroup.com 

and First Class mail 

Donald Bailey, President 

Atlantis Internet Group Corp. 

5601 Morning h,iist Drive 

Harrisburg, PA 171 I 1-3737 

RE: Casino Gateway Ncnvork 

Dear Mr. Bailey: 

This is in rcsponsc to your request for an opinion addressing Atlantis Intcrnet 

Group's Casino Gateway Network. I apologize again for the delay in issuing this opjnien 

and for any inconvenience that may have caused. My staff and J have rcvicwcd your 

dctailed description of thc Casino Gateway Nchvork and its functions and engineering. 

1% have also reviewed the additional information provided by Atlantis" gaming partncrs 

and BMM Campliancc, the independent testing laboratory, and thc information you 

prnvided in c-mail messages and relcphonc convcrsations. It is my opinion that thc 

Unlawful Internet Gan~hling Enforccmcnt Act (UIGEA), 31 U.S.C. $# 5361-5367 docs 

not prohibit the use of thc Casino Gateway Nenvork in or bctwccn licensed Indian 

gaming facilities to administer wide-arca progressive jackpots or to play Atlantis's Rango 

game, bingo, or other Class I1 games. 'rhc Casino Gatcwav Network is, in other words, 

the kind of multi-site system thc National Indian Gaming Commission addresscd in 

Ru 1 l eti n 2009-03, '/Xe /I ffrct nfh Lrn/o~$tl Itrrcn~d Gm~l/li~,q /<~!formmmt Acr of2Dd6 of1 

IVidr-Avo Prnng..s.ri~v L~~lstems and hTemnr6,~~ Mudti- sit^ Bingo Gmms ( March 9, 2CK)q). 

By way nf background, Bulletin 2009-03 set out a straightforward legal analysis in 

support nf its cancInsion that the prohibitions in UIGEA did not apply ra wide-area 

progressive systems (IVA13s) or multi-site bingo systems. IJIGEA, tile bulletin natcd. 

intcndcd no cl~angc in thc status quo for legal and illegal gambling in the 17nircd States: 

No provision of this subchapter shall bc construed as altering, limiting, or 

exrending any Federal or Statc Law or 'Tiibal-Statc compact pwhibiting, 

permit tin^, or rcgulating gambling wirhin thc Unircd Sratcs. 

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 1441 1. St NW. 5ufic 9100. Washington, DC ZOOOS r~'cl.202 632.7(103 Fa: 2117.632 7066 W.NIGC.GOV 

AEGIOHAL OFFICES krtland. OR. 5acramenl0, CA, Phoen~x, A7; 5t Pdtrl, MN, Tulsa. OK 
31 U.S.C. 1$ 5361 (b). Further, thc l~ullcrin said, WAPs 11ar.c Iong becn a pan of lcga! slotmachine garnhling in both cornmcrcisl ancl compactcri Clilss [I1 gaming, B~iIIctin 

20119-03 at p. 3, and in thc adoption of tltc Indian C;:lrning IZe~wIatory Act (IGRA), 25 

1 J.S.C. 88 2701-2721, Congress spccificallv contcmplarcd mufti-site bingo gnmcs and 

other Class I1 games playcri hcnveen facilities using teIecommunications: 

In this rcgarcl, rhe Committce recognizes that tribes may wish tn jr~in with 

other trihcs to coordinate tl~cir Class I1 aperacinns and thereby enllance 

thc porcntial of incrcnsing revenues. For cxamplc, linking participant 

players ar: various reservations, whether in rhe same or diffcrcnt States, by 

means ef telephone, cahlc, television, or satcIlitc may be a reasonable 

approach for tribes to takc. 

.C;. Rcp. No. 100446, at A-9 ( 1'188). 

Reyond this analysis of UIGEA's policy, Bulletin 2009-03 stated that WAPs and 

multi-sitc 'bingo gamcs wcrc outside of UTGI<A's scope bccause, as they arc presently 

cunstructed, tl~cv fall outside IJIGl3h"s definition of ~rn/acfid i~itmretgnmbfirr~g: 

to placc, rcccivc or othenvisc knoxvinglv transmit a bet or wager by any 

means which irn~olvcs the use. at least in part. of the Tntemet, wherc such 

l~et or wager is unlawful undcr any appIicntlIe Federal or Statc law in tire 

Scare or Tribal lands in which the bet or wager is initiated, receivcd or 

othenvise made. 

31 U.S.C. 5 5362(10)(A3, That is. hccarisc WAPs and multi-site bingo systems usc LL closed, proprietary communications networks," they make no use of t11c Internet and 

do not fall within tllis definition. 2009-03 at 3 

Bulletin 2009-03 did nor elaborate funhcr. However, a derailed, tecIlnica1 

explanation, of how and why a cIosed proprietary network does not "involve the use, at 

least in part, of the Intcrner'Vorms the basis of my opinion here. 

A closed proprietary nenvorli or, more comrnonIy, a "private nenvork" is separate 

and distinct from "the Internet" through its rise nf leased communication lines, Virtual 

Private Networks (VIWs), or some cnrnE)inatian of the two. Communications that travel 

over privatc nctworks are isnlatcd from, and not accessible to the Internet, and vice 

versa. This is rrue even though private networks may sbare some infrastructr~re wit11 thc 

Intcrnct. 

The cnsiest way to illustrarc this is to borrow the anaIogy used in the explanation of 

thc technology found on [he /I'o~ia SrrflT1'ork.r wehsirc. S'w, Amnlqqt: Iiac-/I IJNis om I~/uird, 

http://c~mputcr.l1owstuff~v0rks.c~~m/vpn4ltm Imagine that local area networks, or more 

accurately here, networkcd gaming cquipn~ent in a single casino, is an island in a huge 

ocean dottcd by many other islands. "I'he ocean is rhe Internet. 
r . lo tr:lvel or communicate from islnnd to island you can take a public ferry. You 

travel on rhu fcrv's schedule, and your comings and goings are visihlc to others tmveling 

wit11 you. This is the equivalent to logging on to a web sirc through your internut servicu 

proviclcr at Imn~e. You have no control nvcr how or where your traffic is routed. I'ou have 

no conrrol avcr thc wires and rolitcrs that make up thc Internet, just like you havc no 

control over thc orher pcoplc on the ferry. Yo11 arc cxpased to potcnzi:ll security risks if 

the othcr passengers on thc ferry decidc LO misbehave. Id. 

ab continue with the analogy, your island decides ro buiId a bridge tn anotl~er island 

sa that thcre is easier, more sccure and direct way far pcople cn travcl or communicate 

betwccn thc nvn. It is cxpensivc to build and maintain the bridge, cven though the 

island you arc connecting with is vcry close, But the need for a reliable, secure path is so 

great that you do it anyway. Your island would likc to connect t.o a second island that is 

much farther away hut decides that the cost arc simply too much to bear. 

This is very much like having a leascd line. The bridges (leased lincs) arc separate 

from the occan (Internet), yet arc able to connect the islands (casinos). Many companies 

havc chascn this routc because of the need for security and reliability in connecting their 

remote offices. I-Iowcver, if the offices arc vcry far apart, the cost can he pro11 i bitivcl y 

high, just like building bridge across a great distance. 

?b solvc the prc~hfem of expense, you can use a VPN, is a form of communication 

that utilizes sccurcd connections over a publicly available nenvork. While YPNs do use 

existing infrastructure such as the lntcrnct ro establish connections, these connections 

are noncthcless separate from rhc Internet. The term most oftcn used to describc these 

dcdicated connections is a "tunnel" because, conceptually speaking, thesc connections 

arc isolated from their surrounding environment. 

Continuing the island and occan analo-q, using VPNs is akin to giving each 

inhabitant of our island a small snhrnarinc. Although the submarines are traveling in the 

ocean aIong with other traffic, the inhabitants of our two islands could trawl back and 

forth whenever thcy wanced to with privacy and security, invisible to a11 other submarics. 

Again, the submarines (VPNsS are separate From the ocean (Internet), yet are able to 

connect the islands (casinos). Id. 

More technicalIy, VPNs are designcd to only allow access to uscrs on either end of 

the connccrion. These are point-to-point (or casino-to-casino) connections segrcgatcrl 

from the Internet. This lcvcl of isolation is accomplished by using various technologies 

that not only cstablisl~ the tunnel but also how thc information is transported. 'These 

includc: 

a) FirewaIlls): A sccuriry svstem consisting of a cornhination of harcl~varc and 

software that limits the exposure nf a canrputcr or computer nctwork ro attack 

from crackers; cflrnmnnly riscd on local area nenvorks chat are connected to thc 

Internet. 

Cnsino C;nte\wv Nenvork 

p. 3ufb 
b) II'Sec: lntcrnet Protocol Securip pro~irles interopcrsblc, high quality and 

cryptogs;tphically bascd sccririty services ft~r traffic ac che IP layer, such as 

aurhcnticitv, integrity, cconfidentialitv and access conrrol to cacIl 113 paclcet. 

C) Bio~nctric Authentication: Ilnd uscr sccuritv measure that cnsurcs uscr login and 

identification :ire based on uniquu physiolagical characrcristics such as fingerprint 

identification. irislrcti nal scanning, voice rect~gnition, etc. 

d) Advanced Encryptio11: A crypto~raphic algurithm that can be used to protccr 

electronic data. ?'he AES algorithm can be used zo encvpt lenciphcr) and 

dccrypt (decipher) information. Encsyption convcrcs data to an unintelligible 

form callcd ciphcrtext; decrypting the ciphertext converts the data hack into irs 

original form, callcd plaintext. 

More technically still, the Internct Assignccl Numbcrs Authority (TANA), the 

central registry for Internet protocol addrcsses. stares that addresses rcscrvcd for private 

networks arc separate from addrcsses allocated to the public Internct. Internet prococol 

addrcsscs (or "IIJ addrcsscs") are the unique identifiers for cach computer on che 

Internet or on privatc ncnvorks. They rangc in valrie from 0.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255. 

The addresses that range from 10.0.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255, 172.16.0.0 - 

1 72.3 1.255.255, and 1 Y 2. I A8.0.0 - 1 92.16R.ZS5.255 arc so-called "special use" addresses 

rcscrved from private networks. A private home nenvork of three computers linked II~ 

Microsoft's 'CVindows operating system uses addrcsscs in thc last range. WNs rypically 

use addresses in the first. Ry dcsign, thcn, private nenvorks so constructed do not have 

any direct JP connec~ivity outsjdc of the network. Lh. e.g. KFC 1918, Nctwork Working 

Group, Jfe~t Cruvrft Prartcefur Add~.r.r A/kocntiotr for Private 1trtcn1tlt.r { Fe b mary 1 996). 

Comnlunications across a VPN are invisible to anyonc on thc Entesnct or, indeed, to 

anyone without authorized access to the tunnel. In short, at the engineering level, 

private nenvorks arc not "thc Internet." CVAPs and mulri-site bingo games huilt on 

private networks do not involvc "the use, at least in part, of the Internet" and are not 

unlawftil intcrncr gambling lindcr UIGEA. 

Reduced tn its essentials, I understand thc Casino Gateway Nenvork to consist of a 

gaming systcrn with single- and multi-playcr stations built around a clicnt-scrver 

architecture. A library of Class I1 and Class 111 games is apparently available, along with 

nccounting, money and credit handling, and ticketing support. More germane to the 

issue here. rhc Casino Gatcway Network can link games in multiplc casinos across a 

VI'N whcrc cach casino is ~t the end of a sccurc VI'N tunnel. It does so with some of thc 

standard VPN technologies rlcscribed above. According rn a lerter suhmittecI bv RMM 

Compliance, which also revicwed detailed descriptions of thc system, thc Casino 

Gatcway Network 

uses Incernet Protocol Sccuri cy (IPSec) with a Mrtual Private Network 

(VI'N) tunncl for connections to the svsrcrn. The encryption riscd for 

communication is the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) with a key 

size of 256 hits. Thc network rnakcs use of niultiple firewalls wit11 "deny 

Casino Gatcwny Nenvork 

p. 4 of h 
all" rules and filtering by sourcc Enternct F'rococnl (IPS address and port 

numhcr. The routers on rhe edges uf the architccturc usc Access Control 

1,Ests (AI;1,3 and the Hot Srandhy Router Protocol IHSKP) to control 

access and provide redundancy. The scsvcrs used for transactions and the 

database use ip-tahlc to control packet routing. 

I,cttes from John Galonka, Business Ilevclopment Manager, 13;MhiI Compliance, to 

h lichael Gross, Associate GuncraI Counsel. NIGC (Jrt ne 23, 2009). 

In short, given all of the foregoing, it is my opinion that the Casino Gatctvay 

Newark is a privntc nenvark. Administering a hlAP and the play of Bango, bingo, or 

othcr Class II games across the nenvark in nvo or more licensed cribal casinos docs not 

in\foIvc the lrsc of the Intcrnclt, and such uses arc not prohibiter1 by UI(31:A. 1 make a 

few. final additional comments. 

I note that the Casino Gateway Ncnvork contains a fcature called Entertainment 

Plus, which as descrihed allows a player ro vicw the results of ccrtain games over the 

Internet. It does not allow players tn play these games. For example, a player who 

pr~rchases cf~ances in Atlantis's Bango Football Grid game ac rhc casino may leave and 

check rhc rcsults on line at home using a pair of unique idcntifirrr numbers issucd at the 

casino. tvhere winnings must also be co1Iected. 

This docs not change my opinion abour, the Casino Gateway Nemvork as a privatc 

network. It is my understanding that Entertainmcnt Plus may only bc used to check 

rcsults of completed games, not to play games. Put slighrlv diffcrentlg thc resltlts of 

cornplercd games are made available to players on the Internet using the access numbcrs 

provided. Checking tlre results of completed wagers on the Internet does not constitute 

Internet gaming or wagcring involving the use of the Internet, in wholc or in part, 

because thc wagcring is complctc at the casino. Sre PlayAway lccter from Penny J. 

Coleman, NTGC Acting Gencral Counsel, to Heidi McNcil Staudemeier, Esq. (Aug. 11, 

20061. 

I note as well that the Casino Gateway Nctrvork can be configured to allow playcrs 

to access and pIay casino games from their home computers. I'tcs~zrnably, this feature is 

planned to take advantage of I.JIGEA's so-called safc harbor provision, 31 IJ.S.C. 

5 53hZ(IO)(C), which ptrrports to aIlow the use of rhc Internet for intra- and inter-trihal 

tvagcrs under ccrtain conditions. I offer no opinion about the permissibility of playing 

from hemc, cven if located on tribal land, or of the scope and effect of IJICXA's safe 

11arbor as that is an open question of law about which the Unircd Statcs has not yet 

taken ;a position. I Iikc~vise ofkr no npinion on another opon question, whcrhcr [he 

Casino Gatcway Nerwork may be used to play Class TI1 games such as slot machines. 

FinalIy, this opinion is advisory in nanlrc only and mily be superseded, rcvcrscd, 

rcvisccl, or scconsitlererl. I:urthermore, if the Casino Gateway Nemrork fails to conform 

xvirh, or differs from, tllc fc~rcgoing description, such differences might matcriallv alter 

this opinion. It is also my unc'lcrstanding tltlac thc Casino Gateway Nerwork design and 

docun~entation has bccn reviewed by an indcpender~t testing laboratory. 'This opinion 

Casino Gatcrvay Nenvork 

p.5ofh 
should be rclicd upon only 1vht.n an independent rcsdng lahorator)l Ilas fully tcsted and 

rcviewed thc Casino Ciareway Ncnvork and has confirmed rhar its featurcs and functions 

are as they haw hccn clescsibcd. Furthcr. llefore thc C:asino C;atewily Ncnvork lnay he 

offercd for usc in trihal casinos for rllc play of Class I1 games, it must be tested for 

uonzpliancc tvith thc rcquirernenrs of NIGC's 'Ikchnical Standards, 25 C.F.R. part 547, 

by an indepentlent testing laboratory and appmvcd for use by tlic relevant trihal gaming 

If you have any questions, please fcel frec to call Michael Gross, Assnciate Gcncral 

Counsel, Gcnerai Idan?, aar 202-632-3003. 

I'cnny J. Coiernan 

Acting Geneml Counsel 

Casino Garcway Necrirork 

p.00fh