Topic: Why they need a license if bitcon is not money? - page 20. (Read 4439 times)

"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.

Eh, doesn't it seem otherwise judging from the above discussion? I don't think most of us trust those licenses, considering how cheap and easy it is to get them. Are you sure you can just trust a new casino with a license without doing any research at all? If anything, reputation and forum presence are probably more valuable for Bitcointalk members. I'd argue that if any business can provide the basics on how their games work and others can verify there is no malicious code involved, that should be good enough as a basis to 'trust' the service or not. Don't trust, but verify is more valuable than some random license that anyone can buy with a fake ID. CMIIW.

Many comments have negate from the government point of views about kyc and what they own demands are about it, for a gamblers, licenses means trust and authentication of the business, so it very obvious that more gamblers will trust a casino that have license compare to the ones that doesn't have such license.
For the sake of trust, casinos will prefer to go along with all liceseing demands, so as to gain the trust of those gamblers around instead of not having licenses but needing to build all the reputations which have to take a lot of time to achieve.
So liceseing to s very important key for a casino at all time and most unlicensed casinos doesn't have that trust from the community.

"Crypto casinos" are not yet regulated anywhere, the one being regulated is running the "casino" itself, whether it is a accepting cryptocurrency or not. That's why there are options to pay via fiat in other ways. And who else doesn't wants to run a "licensed" casinos when getting them is very cheap.

And just like what I post before, getting a license is very cheap and it's no way a good measurement if the casino are not going to scam us. Perhaps we gamblers take it just as a face value as it become a so called norm to have licenses and then show it to everyone, look we are legit, go play with us as Curacao has given us licenses.

LOL, and then gamblers fall for it, and then later realized that it was a scam site, bitch around the community that they have been scammed by thousands of dollars. And I don't see any benefits as well for online platforms for getting it, they are just being milk by Curacao to go and apply for licenses that no gamblers are going to look at.

but in reality, how many complaints really did go thru the licensing authority? i bet it is almost none, as going thru the process of lawsuit and all is a headache and will incur a lot of expenses. so the use of of these curacao license logo or any other gambling license logo is just a front that you are doing legal business. but they are not really important if your business is already doing legit activities. however, as there are so many fraudulent activities happening around, people are changing their stance regarding decentralised casinos. they feel they have more confidence if the casino has a valid gambling license.
by the way, the OP forgot to mention the bitvest casino, under LL. they have their share of ups and downs but still surviving up until now. they have no gambling license to boast of, but is one of the long-running casino in the forum.

I think in some cases the money is accesory and not the main thing. Let me explain, the lincese and the regulation is more like a judge in case of some problem between you and the gambling house, is like you think X gambling site doesnt make the things right well someone has to be the judge right? and that judge has to be a third party and preferabily a specialized one.

And CANT be a enterprises because you know..... maybe that enterprise is also the owner of some gambling site, so its gonna be necesary to be a state owned.

I think that is the main point anda lso is to avoid some other problems from other big countries by the owners of the sites.

I support your point about the crypto gambling needs to be more desentralized, but is hard to do.

Seriously guys... crypto casinos going with Curacao licenses, this doesn`t have anything to do with governments... you don`t seem to be getting the point.

Unfortunately, this seems to become yet another spam thread.

Indeed the government is acting on both sides, firstly, turning their backs on the industry that has presented a different approach towards innovation and transparency, greatly contributing to the growth and development of the economy. Now they want to issue licenses, as a disguise, to extort money from the same people who they claim not to approve of their underlying technology.

Your words are logical but most of the people before gambling in an online casino first check from where the casino is licensed. And people avoid gambling in those casinos that are not licensed. And if you look, all the casinos in the leading position in the gambling industry are licensed. With these three options deposit, wager, and withdraw, nothing else is really needed and none of us would have had to pay so much money to Curaçao if there were no scammers here. If we see most of the gambling sites without license are scammers. If I myself was told to gamble in a new casino without a license, I would not gamble there.
And I explored the names of the three casinos that you mentioned and found that out of these three, bustabit and Freebitco.in are licensed, especially freebitco.in is licensed by Curaçao. If you want, you can scroll down to see the picture.

Licence needs to save the funds of their users too. If any gambling site has no licence and once becomes reputed or gets a good number of deposits/losers then it may stop their business easily. And on the same time they avoid paying the winnings of their users. So, licences need to protect the funds of their users.

Well, I agree with you... Crypto should be free for all, without geo and other kind of restrictions. And I believe that some part of crypto (I am not sure how big that part can and will be) will stay like that and will represent some freedom.

I think you already answered your question from the headline. Curacao and many other governments just wish to make more money... everything is taxed and regulated, so can we expect them to let crypto alone? I don't think so... what we can do is to try to avoid some regulations as much as we can, but as it seems that becomes harder every year.

That's how the world is run, by making people feel like there's laws they have to uphold, but in reality all these laws are made by people who run the show for other people who run the show.
For example, you a small gambler, have to undergo KYC when you try to withdraw $500, which is even below the minimum that can be flagged by banks. Like in the EU they will not even care about anything below 1k EUR, which is like 1.1k USD, so banks won't care, governments won't care, but a casino will. Why? Because your personal data is worth more than $500, which is why many companies will pay you for referrals, provided that the other person goes through KYC. They don't care if you make them money as long as you bring real traffic and personal data for the company because that database boosts value of the company.

I never sell my data and I never do KYC. KYC enforced on small transaction is abusive.

Unfortunately governments always look to step in in any way they can. It's only going to get worse and worse for the crypto user I think. Governments are going to look for more and more control and make sure they get their piece of the pie.

Could be worse man and there be no online gambling at all. How can we improve and take control away from the governments?

Having your KYC activated its a great chance of making deposits and withdrawals,so definitely no need for a license.

Cause with this you can make deposits in casinos without stress.
The govt. thinks they are trying to make things worse,but they dont know there are multiple means to achieve the target rather than license.