Can a licensed video poker device maker supply software for Louisiana's central monitoring system?

Plain-English summary

A state senator asked whether a licensed video poker device manufacturer could receive a contract connected to Louisiana's central monitoring and control system. The system let State Police poll gaming devices and shut them down remotely. In 2005, the Attorney General read La. R.S. 27:316(B) to bar a licensed manufacturer from taking part in control or direction of polling or remote shutdown.

The AG said the prohibition did not appear to prevent a manufacturer from developing, providing, and supplying software, or perhaps maintaining it, so long as the manufacturer lacked the ability to poll or disable devices. Whether a proposed contract amounted to prohibited participation in operation required a case-specific review of its terms.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2005 under the video poker statutes cited below. Verify current licensing and system-operation rules before using it to assess a contract.

What this means for you

Licensed manufacturers and software vendors

The opinion distinguished supplying or possibly maintaining software from controlling the system's polling and shutdown functions. Its permissive answer was conditional: the licensed manufacturer could not have the ability to perform those operations.

State gaming and contract officials

The AG did not approve a particular bid or contract. It said the terms of each proposal would determine whether the licensed manufacturer would participate in operating the central system.

Common questions

Does a gaming-device manufacturer's license automatically bar a software contract?

The AG said no categorical bar followed from the cited statute for software development or supply. The manufacturer could not control or direct polling or remote shutdown of video poker devices.

Could the manufacturer maintain the system's software?

The AG said perhaps, provided the manufacturer could not itself poll or disable devices. It left the answer for a particular proposal to review of the contract terms.

What counts as “participate in the operation”?

The opinion interpreted the phrase as taking part in control or direction of the system's polling or disabling functions. It did not provide a blanket answer for every possible vendor role.

Background and statutory framework

La. R.S. 27:302(A)(5)(o) required video draw poker devices to connect to a central computer for monitoring and remote shutdown. La. R.S. 27:316(B) barred licensed manufacturers, distributors, and device owners from participating in operation of the programs, software, or devices used for those functions. The AG used ordinary-meaning principles, citing State v. Truby, to interpret “participate in the operation.”

Citations

• La. R.S. 27:316(B) (restriction on licensed parties' operation of polling and shutdown systems).
• La. R.S. 27:302(A)(5)(o) (central computer link for device monitoring and shutdown).
• State v. Truby, 29 So.2d 758 (La.1947) (statutory reading cited by the opinion).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/05-0164

Original opinion text

May 4, 2005
Opinion Number 05-0164

Honorable Jay Dardenne
State Senator
District 16
P.O. Box 94183
Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9183

Dear Honorable Jay Dardenne:

You requested an opinion as to whether a “licensed device manufacturer is eligible to be awarded [a] contract to participate in the operation of a central system.” By way of explanation, the Louisiana Department of Public Safety, Office of State Police, operates a Central Monitoring and Control System (“System”) which connects all licensed and enabled video gaming devices. This system provides the State Police with the ability to monitor video draw poker device operation and to remotely shutdown those operations.

La. R.S. 27:316(B) provides:

No person licensed by the division as a manufacturer, distributor, or device owner may participate in the operation of any computer programs, software or device which is used for the polling or reading of video draw poker device operations or for the remote shutdown of those operations as provided for in R.S.
27:302(A)(5)(o).

La. R.S. 27:302(A)(5)(o) provides that the licensed and enabled video draw poker devices “must be linked by telecommunication to a central computer for purposes of polling or reading device activities and for central computer remote shutdown of device operations.”

In analyzing this section, it is necessary to interpret the specific language used in the statute, particularly the phrase “participate in the operation”. The following rules of statutory construction provide guidance: The words of law must be given their generally prevailing meaning. La. C.C. Art. 11. Words and phrases shall be read with their context and shall be construed according to the common and approved usage of the language. La. R.S. 1:3. A statute should be given a construction according to fair import of its words taken in their usual sense, in connection with the context, and with reference to the purposes of the provisions. State v. Truby, 29 So.2d 758 (La.1947).

Page 2

Honorable Jay Dardenne
OPINION OR- 05-0164
Page 2

The use of the phrase “participate in the operation” implies a joint or shared effort in the control or direction of a certain function, in this instance, the Central Computer System for the polling and disabling video draw poker devices. To paraphrase, the pertinent provision of the applicable statute can be read as follows: No licensed manufacturer may take part in the control or direct the functioning of the polling or disablement of video draw poker devices. This would not seem to limit a licensed manufacturer in developing, providing and supplying the computer program or software for the System, or perhaps even maintaining the applicable software, as long as the licensed manufacturer does not have the ability to poll or disable devices; in other words, operate the System. Of course a specific determination of whether there is “participation in operation” would need to be made on a case by case basis under the terms of any proposal submitted by a licensed manufacturer.

We trust the foregoing to be of assistance. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if we can be of further assistance.

Very truly yours,

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR.
ATTORNEY GENERAL

Leonce G. Gautreaux., Assistant Attorney General Deputy Director, Gaming Division

CCF, jr./LGG/wba

Page 3

OPINION 05- 0164
Syllabus

R.S. 27:316 (B)

No licensed manufacture of video draw poker devices may take part in the control or direct the functioning of the state Central System which is used for polling and remote shutdown of video draw poker devices.

Honorable Jay Dardenne
State Senator
District 16
P.O. Box 94183
Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9183

Date Received:

Date Released: May 4, 2005

Leonce Gautreaux
Assistant Attorney General
Deputy Director, Gaming Division