Topic: Why they need a license if bitcon is not money? - page 14. (Read 3051 times)

Not really that shocking not really that surprising on that government would really be always loving on trying out to control or to take grasps on everything on which it wont really be something
that new that as long they could possibly be able to integrate those regulations and those laws then there would really be no other ways to escape since you would really be obliged
on paying up those taxes or being that snipped out with those things. Yes, it is really that for the better good when it comes to economical aspect.
It is really just that they cant really be able to skip out into those things which something that could be beneficial.

Governments of several countries trying to control KYC policy to maintain taxes for the people of those countries. If there is no rule and anywhere they perform the buy/sell/exchange the the government will not be able to take taxes from them. So to ensure the tax they have to specific terms to their people.

The main point here seems to be that licenses from Curacao don't actually carry much weight legally in most places around the world.  Any online gambling sites operating with just a license from Curacao are likely breaking the law across a lot of different countries.  These kinds of licenses mostly just provide a sort of fake sense of legitimacy for players on shady sites.  But we all know if issues ever come up with one of these gambling operations, that slip of paper from Curacao won't be getting anyone's money back or resolving problems.


Yes. You could. And such a license would have the same value for me personally as a license from Curacao. Both casinos are equally illegal in my part of the world as they are not licensed under the legislation I am subject to. I'm from the EU. But the same is true for, for example, the US, and most other countries in the world. For the people running the sites it allows them to technically claim to meet licensing requirements.  But for users it's more illusion than reality when you scratch beneath the surface.

What makes casinos using bitcoin endeavor to get a license for operation is due to the mentality of the gamblers that make use of these casino's, hardly you see gamblers get so comfortable making use of casinos that are not registered and licensed under government as they fear that they can be easily scammed and there's no channel that they can go register their grievance that could compel the casino to do the needful. Despite this, there are still casinos that operates without license and they have been with a recommendable reputation.

You know, first of all, that I don't believe that Bitcoin is money; most people know that. It's not because it can't be touched; it's not really money anymore, but almost all casinos accept it when it comes to the category of deposit to gamble. Isn't it like cheating when they do that?

Although, until now, there are still countries that do not recognize Bitcoin in their countries, we know the reason why: they know they have no ability to really control it because what they want is for them to have an advantage, of course.

Although Bitcoin is called a "digital currency," some people and businesses need licences to use it legally and compliantly.

• Digital currencies like Bitcoin are government-controlled. These groups enforce AML and KYC laws when people buy and sell cryptocurrencies. Obtaining a licence shows that some groups take these rules seriously.
• Licencing protects consumers by requiring cryptocurrency businesses to follow rules. Stopping fraud, protecting customer funds, and resolving disputes can help the cryptocurrency industry gain trust.
• Licencing bodies require cryptocurrency businesses to take security measures to prevent theft, fraud, and hacking. These standards help businesses protect their clients' assets and operate safely. They can implement strong security and conduct regular audits.
• A cryptocurrency licence can help a business gain recognition. This recognition can attract investors, make partnerships easier, and provide financial services to licenced businesses.

Remember that cryptocurrency laws vary by location. Some countries have licencing systems, while others are still creating them. Individuals and businesses should consult lawyers to determine local business rules.

I agree with you that if any problem happens with the gambling sited as well as the gambler then the problem need to make a solutions. And if the gambling site has no regulations then the site may go away and there might have no way to resolve the issue. So licence is helpful for the gambler mainly.

agree with this mate everyone of us have different perspective and way of looking in Bitcoin and some of us are already know that Bitcoin is not a scam and Bitcoin is very good to invest but there are many people around the globe that they will not accept Bitcoin and the best example of these are governments which they didn't accept Bitcoin in their country and we don't know the main reason why they don't accept Bitcoin. But nowadys there some countries that they are now accepting bitcoins than before .

I hope that's the case and that the casino platforms will and can exist without regulation, but so many online casinos got their domain and are hosted on platforms that are regulated by the government they can easily ask the registrar and the host to stop registration and hosting platforms casinos that do not adhere to international laws on AMLAC.
And worse they can mark these platforms as part of money laundering as they did in many mixers, online casinos are legit profit-making business ventures so they have no choice but to be compliant and go in the direction of what legit online companies should do and that is by getting licenses.

Very good discussion glad OP created this kind of discussion you might want to open a poll on what the community thinks

I have been reading all the answers from the community, and your comment is the only one that doesn't have sense at all... If Curacao licenses doesn't have anything to do with governments, then why people don't get a license from their own country?

The point here is simple, there are a bunch of business who find a gap in the legal system. Decide to play it smart and put the rules on the table about how crypto gambling should work on a legal way. And from my point of view is a bad joke that someone who lives in Australia have their servers on India and their Gambling license from Curacao.

I mean, i can open a casino and say it will operate under the "United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea", where there is no jurisdiction.

This is not a spam thread, is a good discussion, and i enjoy reading all your points of view.

For me I believe that licensing is far more better than none licensing in casinos today reason is that, with licensing, there will be more trust and confidence that at least the platform is real and legit with a physical office because, in some countries, one of the criteria for approving a license for a casino is to have a physical office so with that at least gambler's who patronize them will have a place to direct they enquiries and complains to and getting a one on one to receive direct attention.


Also, another advantage of a licensed casino is the fact that one can easily sue them in court if they violate any of the set agreements, this kind of redress can't be gotten from an anonymous casino.

It is a clear contradiction, sure. In terms if functionality, Bitcoin is indeed money, because money is supposed to be a vehicle to transfer value between parties in a decentralized way. The thing is that governments do not want to openly admit Bitcoin and other alternative coins are equivalent to money, because that would imply they are given much recognition and platforming Bitcoin in the most important economies of the planet, which would put Bitcoin to the same level of their FIATs.
On the other hand, the licences are put in place by some government, because of the implications of the volume of wealth going through casinos and could facilitate crimes like money laundering, tax evasion...

Is it possible to finance terrorism with something which is not money? Is it possible to launder money using something which is not even money? Those are question which one was supposed to try to answer before lashing against regulators and their agents.

Bitcoin is money, the establishment won't admitting but in my meantime they will regulate Bitcoin as money in casinos and exchanges. The typical hypocrisy of governments and those in the top of them. Nothing new under the sun, my friends.

The casino licenses the site.  Because they are here to do real business.  If they don't have a license they can't operate it legally.  Deposits can be made not only through bitcoins or bank cards, but also through crypto casinos.So if casino sites do scam then legal action will be taken against them.  Because they have to main the right documents while licensing.  So if they scam it will be easy to find them.

Don't get this wrong, I do not think the government can be so dumb as to say Bitcoin is not money when they know it is an asset, a tradeable one for that matter, you may only misquote them. Except that they fear Bitcoin is not supported by any physical asset, but they are wrong there as people's money is enough to support it.

You have a good point here, most of these casinos are just overbearing, and the Curacao license is not that strong to warrant what they are trying to pretend. Still, they should be prepared in case they are the subject of investigation one way or another. And this time, cryptocurrency will not save them as they must reveal all their financial flows crypto or not.

This is because regulation of crypto usage is still weak, with time, cryptocurrency users will be more accountable, and the time is near. No casinos will be able to operate over time as if they are not in the world bound by any law. For those casinos that are operating in sane environments, they have to be more accountable due to regulations and internal inventigations. You are not an insider, a lot is there for them to be answerable to as government officials and law enforcers will always be on their neck.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" is a famous quote by Benjamin Franklin which is now more topical than ever. Unfortunately, it is also true that there are many bad actors out there and, specially in our crypto industry, the exit scam cases are utterly frequent.

Would we be voluntarily willing to give up our liberty in our communications, for instance? I don't think so. But, as long as these online casinos are not decentralised and therefore we have to TRUST them (the very problem Satoshi tried to solve), I don't see licensing such a big attack to our freedom. My two sats.

Casino is no different from exchanges. If exchanges are regulated, therefore Casinos needs to be regulated too.

Exchanges deals with crypto, casino deals with crypto, there's no difference. So it doesn't make sense to question why Casinos need a license.

Yes your points are quite logical as we always want to be safe.  It doesn't hurt us much when we lose gambling but it hurts us a lot when we see that a casino site has scammed us and we lost the money we had there. So we think that sites that are licensed won't scam so easily because when they got a license they submitted their personal information there.  So these things give us some courage to use that site.  And casino sites also use this opportunity to attract gamblers

Sadly, Most of the gambler in crypto think like what the user that you quoted probably because there’s a lot scam casino before that can easily setup their website and offer games. Due to the popularity of Curacao license, this scam casino is moderately reduced or being avoided by players since not all scammer can acquire license from Curacao since it requires additional money unlike before that they will just need to setup a online casino.

License doesn’t guarantee trust but somehow it gives crypto user more confidence to play on this casino because they knew that the casino is registered and regulated even though the license provider is not that reliable. 

For me, Playing with licensed casino will give me a little but of peace of mind rather than those casino that operating on their own because they have nothing to lose aside from their website is very easy to setup again.

I confess that I have also spent many hours trying to understand what the purpose of the casino license was, given that crypto casinos do not have physical headquarters and that in many European countries, America has been a country on the list of countries banned by casinos. . It's funny that even Curacao, which is the country that issues licenses, is also on the list of countries restricted by casinos. When a casino goes scam and people complain to the Curacao government how they are responsible for issuing many licenses, they do nothing. I've never seen any news talking about what the Curacao government did to arrest scammers

Probably the fact that the Curacao government is on the list of restricted countries in casinos means that the Curacao government is not responsible and they do not even spend time investigating and punishing the scammers. for there to be many people who create casinos with licenses in Curacao and steal people's money and disappear, so I suppose that when dealing with the license in Curacao, people don't go in person, when I talk about people I'm referring to the casino owners, they don't go personally dealing with the license, it is just my suspicion or assumption. Another thing I see is that I have never seen any casino say that Curacao regulators carried out inspections at the casino. So why the hell do they keep asking casinos to have licenses?

governments talk a lot about money laundering, which is why they force casinos to ask for kyc. So far it makes perfect sense, of course it is necessary for casinos to set wagering requirements so that people avoid using the casino to launder money. kyc makes sense, but the license makes no sense since there are many countries with a good reputation that do not accept giving such licenses. Honestly, it's difficult to understand governments when it comes to this licensing issue.

Not long I raised a topic titled License: is it a guarantee?, in it I was questioning the assurance of a licence casino not to scam or in anyway trample on its customers and most of the replies made in that thread emphasized on the possibility of licensed casinos to still scam their customers despite having a license that puts them on regulatory watch, and it got me thinking.

It really got me thinking, as in, why then does license matter matter so much to gamblers about a casino instead of it's reputation over the years. In as much as a casino has been up and doing over length of year reputably rendering unquestionable gambling services to their customers without even obtaining a license then such casino ought to be encouraged by those of us that are in support of decentralization of bitcoin by massively make use of their service, because such a casino is invariable leaning and promoting the ethos of decentralization against KYC requirements that licensed owned casinos are mainly known for as a result of the regulatory policies binding them through the license.