3 ms·

Is it definitely clear that it would be legal for a startup based in the U.S. and with American founders to use Betable? It wasn't until "Black Friday" (http:/

by dsrguru 14y ago

Is it definitely clear that it would be legal for a startup based in the U.S. and with American founders to use Betable? It wasn't until "Black Friday" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(2011) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(2011)) that it became clear the U.S. government viewed NLH poker as a game of chance, and Googling I've done in the past suggests that certain aspects of the government's intrepretation of online poker's legality remain vague. So is it a definite that what the U.S. government viewed as criminal money laundering was not that Americans were taking income from running online casinos but rather that those three casinos were allowing Americans to gamble? Or was it that those casinos made money off of their American customers? I.e. would a gambling site that didn't take a rake and just ran on ad revenue be allowed to have American customers? (I assume not, but then I'm unclear what the alleged money laundering charges were.) So to make a medium-length post short, I'm an American citizen. Would I definitely be allowed to use Betable? If so, this is great news for me.

wilfra 14y ago
"is it a definite that what the U.S. government viewed as criminal money laundering was not that Americans were taking income from running online casinos but rather that those three casinos were allowing Americans to gamble?" It is definitely that they were allowing Americans to gamble. "would a gambling site that didn't take a rake and just ran on ad revenue be allowed to have American customers?" This definitely would not be allowed. You mentioned the money laundering charges a couple of times. Those were ancillary charges. The primary charge was that they were operating an illegal online gambling business i.e. letting Americans gamble on the internet. "I'm an American citizen. Would I definitely be allowed to use Betable?" It is not illegal for an American company to offer real money online gambling to citizens of other countries where it is legal and regulated. So Zynga could get a UK gambling license and offer online gambling to UK citizens. It is a long, slow, difficult and expensive process - Betable has already done it and is allowing others to leverage their infrastructure (legal and technical).
- dsrguru 14y ago
  Thanks! Would companies using Betable need to get licenses from the same countries that Betable already has licenses from (which so far means the UK) or would Betable's licenses mean that users of Betable would be covered as well. Edit: Just discovered the 50/50 revenue share. That's going to turn away a lot of potential customers.
  - cellis 14y ago
    Also don't just jump into this shit unless, you know, you have legal counsel that specializes in gaming. It's still a huge risk. E.g. U.S. customers could circumvent and bet on your site. Guess what, you're on the hook for that!
    - davidtyleryork 14y ago
      That's incorrect cellis. Betable is handling all gambling, so any gambling-related legal risk (such as US customers gambling) is strictly our problem. This is why we have advanced geolocation, IP and identity checks.
      - cellis 14y ago
        Incorrect that U.S. developers of a game implementing Betable could be targets of legal action? Or incorrect that your software is circumventable? Here's another question. Is Betable willing / able to provide legal counsel to U.S. developers who get squeezed by the FBI?
  - davidtyleryork 14y ago
    Betable handles all of the gambling, so game companies working with us do not need licenses. This is a key piece of our value proposition: licenses cost millions of dollars and take years to acquire. As for the revenue share, given the cost of licenses (mentioned above), and the significant increase in revenue that could come from real-money gambling, we think this is appropriate. Remember that we employ and manage the legal, fraud and compliance aspects of gambling that make it so expensive and time consuming. Also, this revenue share only applies to gambling revenue. Your IAP and ad revenue remains your own.

by dsrguru 14y ago

wilfra 14y ago

"is it a definite that what the U.S. government viewed as criminal money laundering was not that Americans were taking income from running online casinos but rather that those three casinos were allowing Americans to gamble?" It is definitely that they were allowing Americans to gamble. "would a gambling site that didn't take a rake and just ran on ad revenue be allowed to have American customers?" This definitely would not be allowed. You mentioned the money laundering charges a couple of times. Those were ancillary charges. The primary charge was that they were operating an illegal online gambling business i.e. letting Americans gamble on the internet. "I'm an American citizen. Would I definitely be allowed to use Betable?" It is not illegal for an American company to offer real money online gambling to citizens of other countries where it is legal and regulated. So Zynga could get a UK gambling license and offer online gambling to UK citizens. It is a long, slow, difficult and expensive process - Betable has already done it and is allowing others to leverage their infrastructure (legal and technical).

dsrguru 14y ago
Thanks! Would companies using Betable need to get licenses from the same countries that Betable already has licenses from (which so far means the UK) or would Betable's licenses mean that users of Betable would be covered as well. Edit: Just discovered the 50/50 revenue share. That's going to turn away a lot of potential customers.
- cellis 14y ago
  Also don't just jump into this shit unless, you know, you have legal counsel that specializes in gaming. It's still a huge risk. E.g. U.S. customers could circumvent and bet on your site. Guess what, you're on the hook for that!
  - davidtyleryork 14y ago
    That's incorrect cellis. Betable is handling all gambling, so any gambling-related legal risk (such as US customers gambling) is strictly our problem. This is why we have advanced geolocation, IP and identity checks.
    - cellis 14y ago
      Incorrect that U.S. developers of a game implementing Betable could be targets of legal action? Or incorrect that your software is circumventable? Here's another question. Is Betable willing / able to provide legal counsel to U.S. developers who get squeezed by the FBI?
- davidtyleryork 14y ago
  Betable handles all of the gambling, so game companies working with us do not need licenses. This is a key piece of our value proposition: licenses cost millions of dollars and take years to acquire. As for the revenue share, given the cost of licenses (mentioned above), and the significant increase in revenue that could come from real-money gambling, we think this is appropriate. Remember that we employ and manage the legal, fraud and compliance aspects of gambling that make it so expensive and time consuming. Also, this revenue share only applies to gambling revenue. Your IAP and ad revenue remains your own.