of skill, or of chance; in most states, this determination is based on whether the skill-based elements of the game are predominant over those of chance, and whether these chance-based elements have more than an incidental effect on the outcome of the game (dominant factor test, material degree). Some states use stricter criteria, under which games whose outcomes are influenced by any element of chance, or appeal to a "gambling instinct", are considered games of chance, regardless of the presence of skill-based elements. Applying the predominance test, the Supreme Court of Illinois ruled that participants in daily fantasy contests are "actual contestants in the bona fide contest for the determination of skill" and do not violate Illinois' prohibition on gambling. The court disagreed with an Illinois Attorney General Opinion that interpreted "actual contestants" to mean the persons in the athletic contest. In 2015, the Canadian Gaming Association commissioned an opinion on the legality of DFS in Canada from former Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario general counsel Don Bourgeois. He determined that DFS would likely be classified as a game of chance under Canadian law, going on to say in an interview that under the Criminal Code of Canada, games that mix chance- and skill-based elements are considered games of chance. However, Canadian authorities have not yet targeted DFS services; historically, the government has only targeted illegal gambling operations that have a presence within the country. While the service Sport Select offers legal sports wagering games through Canada's lotteries, it is subject to a legal prohibition on wagering on individual sporting events. UIGEA carve-out The UIGEA has frequently been cited as having exempted daily fantasy games from being considered gambling, as the law does not consider an online contest with pre-determined prizes, and an outcome based on skill that is "determined predominantly by accumulated statistical results of sporting events, including any non-participant's individual performances in such sporting events", to be unlawful wagering. The carve-out was based on the language of an amendment proposed by Senator Richard Bryan to the failed Internet Gambling Prohibition Act. The act itself does not define unlawful internet wagering, and expressly refrains from altering the legality of any underlying conduct other than funds transfers, meaning that state law remains binding. It also depends on banks to act as enforcers of the prohibitions. Congressman Jim Leach, who authored the UIGEA, explained that the fantasy sports carve-out was