| >Re: 1b “public policy” is not law, so no it’s not “illegal” just against the betting site rules Not a lawyer, but jurisprudence (case law) is law, especially in Common Law jurisdictions like the US it has even more weight than actually codified law (unlike for example napoleonic Civil Law like in Argentina or France). "Restatement (Second) of Contracts" (1989), Chapter 8, has a pretty extensive list of restatement and examples of case law of contract nullity by being against public policy. Additionally, it's even a more basic rule that contracts are void ab initio if they are about breaking a law, I can see how it might be argued that a contract about a murder is not about breaking the law, but it's debatable and probably fact dependent. There's also probably statutes or UCC that explicitly state such rules, but that's secondary. >Easily skirted by making the bet not directly about death, e.g. https://polymarket.com/event/trump-out-as-president-before-2... Worth noting that polymarket is not in US Jurisdiction, so no, it's not regulated. Kalshi is in US jurisdiction and is regulated by US laws. There was a case that reached some appeal court about election bet in Kalshi, and Kalshi won, you may agree or disagree, but it is under regulation. >Re: 2c also applies to scenario 1, if you get caught you can’t retain the money. Not necessarily, because both parties would be at fault in scenario 1. In scenario 2, the law would not declare the contract void, but award the payment to the non murdering party. In case 1 the whole contract is void, and the court will probably not get involved in any action whether forcing award of monies, nor forcing a party to return money, letting "the loss lies where it falls", in pari delicto. >So, to your point about which is more regulated - there is no difference in the amount of regulation between the two scenarios. It was a very basic mathematical claim, prediction markets include sports bets, so therefore they touch more regulations. The regulations the prediction markets touch is huge, as it can be about anything really, it must follow the regulations of almost every branch of contract law. |
So less regulation. Case 1 is the polymarket/kalshi case.
> It was a very basic mathematical claim, prediction markets include sports bets, so therefore they touch more regulations.
Uber is a taxi company and more. Uber is (or was) still less regulated than taxi industry.
You’re claiming it’s simple math, while grouping things that are categorically different into the same bucket.