|
|
#21
06-12-2005, 10:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
Party would need only *one* solid case and take it to court [/ QUOTE ] Excuse me, but what court are you talking about again and again? The supreme on-line poker court in the island of Trinidad? 
|
|
#22
06-12-2005, 10:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Party would need only *one* solid case and take it to court [/ QUOTE ] Excuse me, but what court are you talking about again and again? The supreme on-line poker court in the island of Trinidad? [/ QUOTE ] Depends on the countries international agreements on jurisdiction as well as internal law. Could be that court, could be any other court. What matters is the effort. See the possibilities instead of potential problems.
|
|
#23
06-12-2005, 10:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Party would need only *one* solid case and take it to court [/ QUOTE ] Excuse me, but what court are you talking about again and again? The supreme on-line poker court in the island of Trinidad? [/ QUOTE ] There are no poker courts. I'm not sure how sarcastic you are, but I hope you realize that regular courts handle civil law, including contractual agreements. If there was no way to enforce international agreements with a firm in a country like Trinidad, it would be useless for a firm to move such a country since noone would do any serious business with them.
|
|
#24
06-12-2005, 10:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
OK, I've read this long enough.
1. Party has resorted to asking for character entry *because* there isn't really a way of detecting someone using a bot system wise; only by certain aspects of behaviour. It's perfectly feasible to hide running software. Thus, they only suspect players of using bots rather than knowing. 2. Where is this court case going to take place? Party is registered in Gibraltar. Would the case take place in Gibraltar? How would they (a) force the defendant to attend, (b) enforce the judgment. How about in the USA? If they take a US citizen to court in the USA, what hope do they have, given that many people believe that internet gambling may be illegal in the USA? Are they going to sue someone for breaking the terms of an agreement to perform a possibly illegal act? Now that's a can of worms that Party wouldn't want to open. I know you want people to support your view that a fine would work. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that the reason you're not getting support is that a fine simply wouldn't work. Onionman PS for comments on legality of internet poker in the USA, I'll pick one out of today's papers. "The Department of Justice says that online poker breaches the Wire Wager Act, which forbids gambling across state lines. Some states also prohibit online betting"
|
|
#25
06-12-2005, 10:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
Could be that court [/ QUOTE ] Well, I sure hope it will be that court! Because this will give a lot of work to my grandfather, who is the oldest and most famous judge at that court, working there for more than 55 years now! And he really needs the bribe money!
|
|
#26
06-12-2005, 11:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What happens when this headline hits: "Party Poker stole my $10K". Players need to trust the site and taking $10K for allegations of cheating (after all trying to conclusively prove someone is using a bot is very hard) will spread fear amongst their customers and they'll move to a site where they know their money will be safe. [/ QUOTE ] The headline would be more like "Party sues bot user for $10k". I'm not talking about some random private enforcement, I mean for Party to go to court. They wouldn't win a case without strong evidence, and they sure wouldn't sue without full certainty of bot usage. I believe that if the bot problem is not addressed soon, we will have no fish instead of less fish. [/ QUOTE ] Hey why doesn't 2+2 put up a disclaimer that spammers will be fined $10,000?
|
|
#29
06-12-2005, 11:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Could be that court [/ QUOTE ] Well, I sure hope it will be that court! Because this will give a lot of work to my grandfather, who is the oldest and most famous judge at that court, working there for more than 55 years now! And he really needs the bribe money! [/ QUOTE ] FWIW, I have more faith in the legal systems of some smaller countries than I have in the legal system of USA. Anyways, there are ways of choosing which court/country will settle contractual agreements, since most legal systems allow those kind of agreements to override standard jurisdiction.
|
|
#30
06-12-2005, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Solving the bot problem
[ QUOTE ]
OK, I've read this long enough. 1. Party has resorted to asking for character entry *because* there isn't really a way of detecting someone using a bot system wise; only by certain aspects of behaviour. It's perfectly feasible to hide running software. Thus, they only suspect players of using bots rather than knowing. 2. Where is this court case going to take place? Party is registered in Gibraltar. Would the case take place in Gibraltar? How would they (a) force the defendant to attend, (b) enforce the judgment. How about in the USA? If they take a US citizen to court in the USA, what hope do they have, given that many people believe that internet gambling may be illegal in the USA? Are they going to sue someone for breaking the terms of an agreement to perform a possibly illegal act? Now that's a can of worms that Party wouldn't want to open. I know you want people to support your view that a fine would work. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that the reason you're not getting support is that a fine simply wouldn't work. Onionman PS for comments on legality of internet poker in the USA, I'll pick one out of today's papers. "The Department of Justice says that online poker breaches the Wire Wager Act, which forbids gambling across state lines. Some states also prohibit online betting" [/ QUOTE ] 1. They have resorted to letter recognition because they can't detect *all* bots. Thus, they sometimes know and not only suspect. 2. I'm not qualified to answer any specific legal issues of this kind, and I seriously doubt that you are. I do know that most of those problems are possible to work around and it would be naive to dismiss the idea of a fine solely on this ground.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
