Poker-AI.org

Re: Legality

2013-11-02T17:05:39+00:00

Because they have bigger guns? It's not so much a question of why, rather just that it's written. i.e. It's within the bounds of their policies to enforce certain laws anywhere in the world, one of which happens to be very ambiguously defined. Realistically, unless you're doing something that really pisses them off and making a lot of money doing it, you likely don't have to worry about it.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Sat Nov 02, 2013 5:05 pm

Re: Legality

2013-11-02T12:12:11+00:00

In my country, poker in general is prohibited. While not for the players, but for the poker companies. The only legal requirement for me - to pay taxes and not be engaged in carding. And why is me (citizen of Ukraine) to obey the laws of UK? (pokerstars)

Statistics: Posted by nefton — Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:12 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-12T19:24:17+00:00

spears wrote:

First of all the casino would have to convince the CPS that TOS violation is fraud. It hasn't happened yet so why would it happen in the future?

My point is that just about anything under UK law can be considered fraud, regardless of TOS violations.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:24 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-12T18:32:53+00:00

They were criminally indicted for "cookie stuffing." They essentially created false referrals, causing the companies to pay them for work they did not do and (additional) traffic that did not exist. It's a bit like a lawyer billing somebody for hours he didn't work (which is blatant fraud) or billing somebody for work that he had nothing to do with. They haven't been convicted yet either. I'll be interested to hear how that pans out, given the technicalities.

IMO, "cookie stuffing" is a far cry from poker botting. Had they gotten bots to do their work for them (not creating false work), even if it had been a violation of the T&C, I don't think that would be considered criminal fraud, at least not in America.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:32 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-11T21:38:58+00:00

I remembered the ebay fraud story

Quote:

eBay alleged that what Hogan did to earn the sting operation and the knock at his door by the FBI was to rig eBay's system so that it falsely credited him for sales he did not generate

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ebay-the-fbi-shawn-hogan-and-brian-dunning-2013-4#ixzz2hS0byjR0

Just breaking the T&C?

Statistics: Posted by flop+2cards — Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:38 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-10T13:08:55+00:00

Quote:

Elsewhere, it would/could be a civil matter, but given the nature of the law, if a casino decided to take action would it become a criminal matter in the UK? It's a bit like they have this catch-all reach, but you're hoping they never use it. That's not the type of gambling I like to do.

I understand the worry but somehow I just don't see this happening.

First of all the casino would have to convince the CPS that TOS violation is fraud. It hasn't happened yet so why would it happen in the future? Then there is the issue of jurisdiction. The law appears to say that fraud can be prosecuted in the UK regardless of who commits the offence or where it is committed. If this were actually carried out millions of foreign citizens would be extradited to the UK every year to be prosecuted. But that doesn't happen.

Statistics: Posted by spears — Thu Oct 10, 2013 1:08 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-09T21:39:58+00:00

- You answered my question with one of your own.
- I've never heard of profit sharing laws about gambling. edit http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forum ... p?t=206804
- Why are you worrying about all this now? Is it because you are leasing out a bot for the first time? To a brit?
- http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2 ... bots-poker

Statistics: Posted by spears — Wed Oct 09, 2013 9:39 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-09T21:23:24+00:00

Nasher wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/q5qjz6k

Quote:

One x transferring criminal property - contrary to Sec 327(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

The winnings from botting is not income received by criminal way?

Statistics: Posted by flop+2cards — Wed Oct 09, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-09T16:54:08+00:00

spears wrote:

Why do you think leasing a bot to someone else is a crime when running one of your own isn't?

Are there profit sharing laws in the UK regarding gambling winnings? If I recall correctly, there are in other countries.

spears wrote:

Compared to the US, the UK is fairly lenient in general.

Generally, you're probably right. In the case of fraud, by definition, it seems the UK isn't. Then there's the question of how this can apply to TOS violations. Elsewhere, it would/could be a civil matter, but given the nature of the law, if a casino decided to take action would it become a criminal matter in the UK? It's a bit like they have this catch-all reach, but you're hoping they never use it. That's not the type of gambling I like to do.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Wed Oct 09, 2013 4:54 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-09T11:00:40+00:00

Why do you think leasing a bot to someone else is a crime when running one of your own isn't?

I don't have hard facts, but I rather doubt that the universal jurisdiction provisions of uk law would be used against a foreign citizen running or leasing bots. The only cases of that legislation ever being used that I heard of involve child abuse, war crimes, drug smuggling and other very serious crimes. Compared to the US, the UK is fairly lenient in general.

Statistics: Posted by spears — Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:00 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-09T09:30:41+00:00

My point exactly. It's why I'm asking these questions. Given the broad definition and jurisdictional reach of fraud laws in the UK I'm wondering where the line is drawn (so I know not to cross it).

I think it's safe to say that botting in and of itself (without collusion) isn't illegal. I'm wondering, however, if somebody were to lease their bot or employ somebody to run it under their own account, if that would be considered fraud?

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Wed Oct 09, 2013 9:30 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-08T09:50:58+00:00

i don't know. If the collusion is a crime in B&M casinos, then it's a crime in online too.

If you are cheating 7 people from 7 different country and you and your friend from the different country and you playing on the different room with different jurisdiction, what's country the crime was committed? It's all very complicated.

Statistics: Posted by flop+2cards — Tue Oct 08, 2013 9:50 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-07T11:25:15+00:00

See section: 1., (2) and (3) here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1993/36

You may need to click 'Open Whole Act' on the left to see everything.

Quote:

6.(3): Conduct punishable under the law in force in any place is an offence under that law for the purposes of this section, however it is described in that law.

By section 6, is it saying the jurisdictional law applies? i.e. In the case of fraud, siting the link I posted a few comments above, for the person to be guilty they would need to show damages in accordance with the relevant law 'where the act was intended to take place'?

Are there any cases where this has been applied to somebody outside of the UK?

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Mon Oct 07, 2013 11:25 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-05T11:44:27+00:00

some quotes:

Quote:

Referral to the police has triggered a fraud investigation

Quote:

PokerStars was able to seize the funds in the 49 accounts it caught, but had no legal remedy available to pursue players in China. It is almost impossible for players on most sites to pursue criminal or even civil action against cheats.

Probably everyone knows that it's a scam, but no one can prove it.

Quote:

It might make me a killer, but it might not make me a criminal.

however, when a ship is involved in certain criminal acts, such as piracy, any nation can exercise jurisdiction under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction.
Universal jurisdiction or universality principle allows states or international organizations to claim criminal jurisdiction over an accused person regardless of where the alleged crime was committed, and regardless of the accused's nationality, country of residence, or any other relation with the prosecuting entity. Crimes prosecuted under universal jurisdiction are considered crimes against all, too serious to tolerate jurisdictional arbitrage. @http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction

scroll down and read:

United Kingdom

An offence is generally only triable in the jurisdiction where the offence took place, unless a specific statute enables the UK to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction. This is the case for:
Sexual offences against children (s. 72 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003)
Fraud and dishonesty (Criminal Justice Act 1993 Part 1)
Terrorism (ss. 59, 62–63 of the Terrorism Act 2000)
Bribery (s. 109 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001)

Statistics: Posted by flop+2cards — Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:44 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-05T10:05:41+00:00

Quote:

Swedish national operator Svenska Spel announced this week that SEK 3.8 million (approximately USD $586k) has been repaid to players who were victims of a bot ring that operated across more than a dozen accounts for at least six months.

The casino repaid them, not necessarily because they were required to do so. And, just because the casino or the news labels them victims, doesn't necessarily make them the victims of an according-to-law crime. The alleged "colluders" haven't even gone to trial yet, have they? I can say I feel certain people were treated unfairly in my place of business and repay what I feel is owed to them, but what I feel or think doesn't necessarily make somebody else a criminal in the eyes of the law.

flop+2cards wrote:

if you killed a man in neutral waters, will you not a killer?

It might make me a killer, but it might not make me a criminal. There are plenty of people that think gambling itself is immoral/unethical and should be illegal (and it is in places like, I dunno, North Korea). If you gamble in neutral waters are you unethical? Don't you ever watch post-apocalyptic movies where societal law no longer exists and people are forced to make tough ethical choices? There's always conflict.

Note: I don't condone killing or collusion. Just trying to make a point about law.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:05 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-05T06:55:04+00:00

just remember the story of the svenska bot ring.

Quote:

@pokerfuse.com

Quote:

That's why this is such an interesting topic, because nothing "happens" in one place and the laws are defined differently depending on where you and the casino are located.

if you killed a man in neutral waters, will you not a killer?

Statistics: Posted by flop+2cards — Sat Oct 05, 2013 6:55 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-04T21:50:42+00:00

spears wrote:

- I think he was found guilty of fraud for opening bank accounts using false (and stolen) id.
- I don't think the bonuses he gained actually mattered to the case
- Fraud is committed whether or not a gain is made, so quantifiable damages don't have to proved

Were they actual bank accounts or online wallets? I ask, because a lot of the online wallets out there, as with the casinos, are located in loosely regulated countries. And, most banks require you to open accounts in person.

In the UK I think you're right, they don't need to show damages. In other countries, however, they may need to (see #5):
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud

That's why this is such an interesting topic, because nothing "happens" in one place and the laws are defined differently depending on where you and the casino are located.

Note: I don't condone stealing IDs or fraud.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Fri Oct 04, 2013 9:50 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-04T13:30:06+00:00

I think botting and collusion is a fraud, but the poker room is not the aggrieved party. You are cheating your opponents. The poker room can help police in the investigation.

if you use the data other real people for play it's called gnoming.

Statistics: Posted by flop+2cards — Fri Oct 04, 2013 1:30 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-04T12:01:53+00:00

Nasher wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/q5qjz6k

This is somewhat related to poker botting, but the guy stole IDs and went after bonuses. The bonuses he gained were quantifiable damages. It says he "opened bank accounts under fake names." It's not clear whether those were online wallets or actual banks located in the UK. Further, where was this online casino located? In what jurisdiction did this act of fraud occur? Surely had the case gone to trial the casino(s) would have to be represented. What if the casino was in another country? I wonder if he had signed agreements with the people whose IDs he used (without altering them) if it would have counted as fraud?

Statistics: Posted by spears — Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-04T11:17:12+00:00

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:17 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T21:49:04+00:00

Nasher wrote:

PolarBear wrote:

which consequently incurred losses to the casino - damage to its gamplay quality, reputation etc.)

This all sounds a bit like defamation, which is very hard to prove quantifiable damages. I'm not sure the law accounts for 'maybes' in regard to criminal acts, at least not where I come from.

Can you show a similar case of fraud where the damages were of quality/reputation?

I don't work in law so I don't have any examples at hand (not sure if they exist either).

Statistics: Posted by PolarBear — Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:49 pm

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T11:48:43+00:00

PolarBear wrote:

which consequently incurred losses to the casino - damage to its gamplay quality, reputation etc.)

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:48 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T11:44:57+00:00

Nasher wrote:

spears wrote:

England & Wales fraud act http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200 ... 5253Dfraud It would appear to a lay person such as me to define poker itself as fraud, though precedent suggests it is not, since poker is played in licensed casinos. So, as lawyers like to tell you, shortly before they present you with a huge bill, "it would be up to a court to decide"

Precedent suggests otherwise, but what's to stop a prosecutor from setting one? I guess what I'm asking is, given how the law is written, how would you defend against it in court? How would you defend against any type of fraud in court? The law seems so general and broad that if you were to wear a toupee to work you could catch a charge.

[speculation]
- I think there is a principle in uk law that if something has been going on for long enough without being prosecuted it is deemed legal. In employment law this is called custom & practice.
- Also, if there is another law which implies that what you might be doing is legal, you can use that as a defence.
- Great post here from PeppaPig http://poker-ai.org/archive/www.pokerai ... 3149#p3149
[/speculation]

Statistics: Posted by spears — Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:44 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T10:27:16+00:00

Nasher wrote:

Further, I may be wrong about this (I'm not a lawyer) but given my understanding of criminal fraud, simply pretending to be somebody you're not isn't illegal until damages occur

(I am not a lawyer, this is all a layman speculating)

Not sure about UK law, but in my country an action is basically considered a fraud if you, by means of deception, managed to make someone do something against his best interest. This definition is very broad and could also be used against botting itself, even without multiaccounting (you've represented to be playing yourself, while it was the bot playing, which consequently incurred losses to the casino - damage to its gamplay quality, reputation etc.)

Also, according to that noble definition, it seems that a lot of everyday business activity is a fraud

Statistics: Posted by PolarBear — Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:27 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T10:02:36+00:00

spears wrote:

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:02 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T09:25:43+00:00

Using bots in not illegal under UK law, as long as there's no collusion going on. That's when it would become 'cheating'.

Statistics: Posted by OneDayItllWork — Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:25 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T09:18:35+00:00

Nasher wrote:

How does the law define criminally what fraud is? If I sit down at a poker table and say I'm tired or drunk when I'm really not, then win your money, is that illegal? What if I used a fake ID to get into the casino?

Statistics: Posted by spears — Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:18 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T08:32:12+00:00

I don't think that you will go in prison if you make collusion, however it's better to be smart:
http://pokerfuse.com/news/poker-room-ne ... den-21-02/

Statistics: Posted by shadehs — Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:32 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T08:10:39+00:00

Alright, that's something else other than fraud.

How does the law define criminally what fraud is? If I sit down at a poker table and say I'm tired or drunk when I'm really not, then win your money, is that illegal? What if I used a fake ID to get into the casino?

Note: I've never done these things nor do I plan to.

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:10 am

Re: Legality

2013-10-03T07:40:10+00:00

With regards to collusion, under UK law it's a criminal offence to improve your odds when gambling. Knowing somebody else's cards would achieve that.

Statistics: Posted by OneDayItllWork — Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:40 am

Legality

2013-10-03T06:59:47+00:00

I don't mean to challenge the rules of this forum by asking these questions, I'm just looking for hypothetical discussion regarding the law, preferably with somebody that knows more than me.

How is multi-accounting fraudulent? Assuming the accounts are owned by legitimate people who are using your AI, no fraud is occurring. Same question regarding collusion, it's not in and of itself fraudulent unless one of the accounts is fake. Unless it's the behavior itself that's fraudulent, in which case it's defined via the TOS (making it a contractual obligation, not a crime).

Further, I may be wrong about this (I'm not a lawyer) but given my understanding of criminal fraud, simply pretending to be somebody you're not isn't illegal until damages occur (unless we're talking about identifying yourself to the government or something). It may incur a breach of contract when signing a TOS agreement, but that's a civil matter (where if any action is to be taken, they still need to show damages as a result of the breach).

The legal FAQ on the old site:
http://poker-ai.org/archive/www.pokerai ... ?f=80&t=49

Statistics: Posted by cantina — Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:59 am