This law is “internet censorship” and “internet blocking”
Swiss consumers are protected from the Internet gambling sites that are targeting Swiss customers illegally and are therefore on a blacklist. Access to these sites will be redirected to a stop site. It points out that the called site in Switzerland offers unauthorized cash games and thus offers neither protective measures nor guarantee for the payment of the profits achieved.
The licensing of offshore cash game providers only works with access protection. Countries that grant such licenses (eg Denmark, Italy, France or Belgium) also use access protection. Without this protection, licenses would be worthless; the related fees and charges would be a major competitive disadvantage to non-licensed providers.
Licensing of offshore cash game providers doesn’t need access protection.
This creates a precedent for other industries.
Access protection is not a precedent for other industries. The game of money is not a normal good, such as Clothes. Gambling addiction and crime risk are the reason that the game of money (as in almost all countries) is limited and associated with strict conditions.
The purpose of access protection is neither homeland security nor digital secrecy. It is simply a matter of protecting against access to providers of illegal online gambling that do not comply with national rules on the prevention of gambling addiction and money laundering, as well as the applicable taxation regime. Over 16 European countries already use access protection, and the trend is rising.
This is a gateway towards blocking sites based on homeland security.
There are lots of loopholes and ways to get around the access protection.
The access protection is effective. This shows the experience from many countries. Access protection warns users that they are accessing an illegal site, which most people are unaware of. It is possible to bypass the lock. The associated effort is too high for "normal consumers". The offshore online gambling companies have financed the signature collection for the referendum with around CHF 500,000. They would hardly spend so much money if this protection were in fact ineffective.