Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9 · Chapter 9.46
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.46.240 (2026)

Gambling information, transmitting or receiving

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Whoever knowingly transmits or receives gambling information by telephone, telegraph, radio, semaphore, the internet, a telecommunications transmission system, or similar means, or knowingly installs or maintains equipment for the transmission or receipt of gambling information shall be guilty of a class C felony subject to the penalty set forth in RCW 9A.20.021.
(2) This section shall not apply to such information transmitted or received or equipment or devices installed or maintained relating to activities authorized by this chapter including, but not limited to, sports wagering authorized under RCW 9.46.0364 and 9.46.0368, or to any act or acts in furtherance thereof when conducted in compliance with the provisions of this chapter and in accordance with the rules adopted under this chapter and conducted in accordance with tribal-state compacts.
[ 2020 c 127 s 10; 2006 c 290 s 2; 1991 c 261 s 9; 1987 c 4 s 44; 1973 1st ex.s. c 218 s 24.]

Notes:

Intent—Effective date—2020 c 127: See notes following RCW 9.46.0364.
State policy—2006 c 290: "It is the policy of this state to prohibit all forms and means of gambling, except where carefully and specifically authorized and regulated. With the advent of the internet and other technologies and means of communication that were not contemplated when either the gambling act was enacted in 1973, or the lottery commission was created in 1982, it is appropriate for this legislature to reaffirm the policy prohibiting gambling that exploits such new technologies." [ 2006 c 290 s 1.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2009–2024 · leading case: Rousso v. State, 239 P.3d 1084 (Wash. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rousso v. State, 239 P.3d 1084 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 18× “That determination is reserved to the legislature, and the legislature addressed the issue by enacting and amending RCW 9.46.240, which criminalizes the knowing transmission and reception of gambling information by various means, including use of the Internet.”
Rousso v. State, 170 Wash. 2d 70 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 17× “That determination is reserved to the legislature, and the legislature addressed the issue by enacting and amending RCW 9.46.240, which criminalizes the knowing transmission and reception of gambling information by various means, including use of the Internet.”
Jenkins v. Washington, 46 F. Supp. 3d 1110 (W.D. Wash. 2014). · cites it 8× “) Following removal to the federal district court, the court dismissed Plaintiffs claims with prejudice upon Mr.”
Internet Cmty. v. State Gambling Com'n, 238 P.3d 1163 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 3× “Both Betcha and the Commission filed motions for summary judgment, which the trial court granted in favor of the State.”
Rousso v. State, 204 P.3d 243 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “¶ 3 In 2005, former RCW 9.46.240 provided that "[w]hoever knowingly transmits or receives gambling information by telephone, telegraph, radio, semaphore, or similar means, or knowingly installs or maintains equipment for the transmission or receipt of gambling information shall…”
Rousso v. State, 149 Wash. App. 344 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “¶3 In 2005, former RCW 9.46.240 (1991) provided that “[w]hoever knowingly transmits or receives gambling information by telephone, telegraph, radio, semaphore, or similar means, or knowingly installs or maintains equipment for the transmission or receipt of gambling information…”
Internet Cmty. & Ent. Corp. v. Washington State Gambling Comm'n, 169 Wash. 2d 687 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 3× “Both Betcha and the Commission filed motions for summary judgment, which the trial court granted in favor of the State. The trial court ruled that bettors on Betcha were engaged in “gambling” as defined in RCW 9.”
Internet Comm. & Ent. Corp. v. State, 201 P.3d 1045 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “com's website promotes and facilitates gambling, and in doing so it transmits and receives gambling information by means of the Internet in violation of RCW 9.46.240; (3) Betcha.com engages in "`[b]ookmaking'" as that term is defined in RCW 9.”
Internet Cmty. & Ent. Corp. v. Washington State Gambling Comm'n, 148 Wash. App. 795 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “com’s web site promotes and facilitates gambling, and in doing so it transmits and receives gambling information by means of the Internet in violation of RCW 9.46.240; (3) Betcha.com engages in “ ‘[bjookmaking’ ” as that term is defined in RCW 9.”
Larsen v. PTT, LLC (W.D. Wash. 2024). “to enjoin further violations, to recover the actual 5 damages sustained by him or her, or both, together with the costs of the suit, including a 6 reasonable attorney’s fee.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.