Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Slot Machine with Bad Software Sends Players To Jail

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the can't-you-see-the-code dept.

The Courts 647

dcollins writes "Previous discussions here have turned into debates over who is liable for faulty software: the programmers, the publisher, etc. Yahoo has a new option: perhaps the users are criminally liable for using the software. From the AP: 'Prosecutors are considering criminal charges against casino gamblers who won big on a slot machine that had been installed with faulty software ... A decision on whether to bring criminal charges could come in a couple of weeks, said John Colin, chief deputy prosecutor for Harrison County. He said 'criminal intent' may be involved when people play a machine they know is faulty.' Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good grief (4, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932013)

Can we stop taking balanced articles and turning them into overly sensationalized summaries? This isn't the 1920's anymore. We don't need to expand an ultra-brief telegraph message or make up details while we wait for a postmarked letter. :-/

Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?

If you put $1 in the machine and got a $10 credit, I should think that the user would figure out that there's more going on than them just being "lucky".

Yahoo has a new option: perhaps the users are criminally liable for using the software.

As TFA says, the Casino contacted the winners about the fault, and several of them agreed to give back their winnings. (Total losses for the casino were nearly $500,000.) Criminal charges are being considered for the remainder of the two dozen people who exploited the machine. Those charges would result in the gambler getting hauled before a judge and made to prove that he thought that he was just "lucky" when the machine gave him a $10 credit for every $1 he put in.

Re:Good grief (4, Insightful)

Skreems (598317) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932071)

As someone who's never used a slot machine, is it completely unheard of for a machine to convert money into "game points" or tokens or credits or something? If I played a slot machine and it said 10 every time I put a dollar in, I'd assume it was 10 plays for a dollar.

Re:Good grief (5, Insightful)

Lord_Ultimate (1049752) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932245)

Having played slot machines semi-frequently myself, I can honestly say that to the best of my knowledge, every machine I have ever played translated the money into credits. Someone who cashed out of the machine, realized something fishy was going on, added more money, cashed out again, rinsed and repeated *might* be someone worth investigating. FTA, The woman who reported the machine to the casino has it right - the casino doesn't give you your money back if a machine jams, so it shouldn't work the other way. If a convenience store gives you too much change, you're under no obligation to correct the mistake. Gambling parlors are basically a license to print money anyway, so I can't imagine $500k will take long to recover.

Re:Good grief (5, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932469)

"The woman who reported the machine to the casino has it right - the casino doesn't give you your money back if a machine jams, so it shouldn't work the other way."

I agree. This was the one point that really stood out in the article to me.

As long as you are not breaking any rules of the game, not cheating, they should not be able to prosecute you. If a person was operating the machine per instructions, insert coin/token, pull handle/push button, no matter what they did, they cannot be held accountable for any crime. If you operate the machine as described, you have a chance of it giving you more money. You intend to try to increase your money on these machines, and if operating it by the rules, there is no crime.

This should be treated much like counting cards at blackjack. If you do it in your head with no mechanical help, you are playing within the rules, and you are not cheating. The casino (except in Atlantic city I think) can tell you they'd not like to take your action anymore, and can even throw you out and not let you gamble there any longer, but, you cannot be charged with a crime. If you play by the rules they give you, you cannot be held criminal.

Re:Good grief (1)

bluekanoodle (672900) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932483)

You've never been involved in running a smaller gambling venue then. Without Slot machines, it's very hard to make it work, and when it does, it has the same rate of return as your average business (Somewhere between 10-20 %) Pretty good, but that's assuming you do it right. You can't just slap up some tables and start printing money.

Re:Good grief (1)

Otter (3800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932499)

If a convenience store gives you too much change, you're under no obligation to correct the mistake.

I'm not sure that's correct. Certainly the general policy under US law is that you're not allowed to exploit obvious errors on a business' part (e.g. obviously mislabeled merchandise).

Mixed feelings (5, Interesting)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932093)

I have mixed feelings about this.

On the one hand, the casino should bear at least some of the responsibility for allowing a faulty machine to give away its money. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect them to inspect equipment for such glaring problems before installing it and letting the public have at it.

On the other hand, if a slot machine has the fact that it costs one dollar to play prominently displayed, and you get ten dollars' worth of credit when you insert your dollar, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up. The people playing most certainly should have reported the error, or at the very least, not exploited it.

At the very least, I think the casino would--and should--have a very strong civil case against the people who exploited the bug and who didn't return the money. If the opposite happened, that people only got one dollar's worth of credit when they inserted a ten-dollar bill, you'd better believe there would have been hell to pay, and maybe even a lawsuit over it. Just because the error is in favor of the customer instead of the company doesn't shift the morality of the issue. As a matter of public relations, though, it might be in the casino's best interest not to push the issue, or to push the issue with the people who programmed the slots incorrectly instead of their paying customers.

As for criminal charges, although I think that exploiting the machines is a pretty scummy thing to do, I have a hard time thinking it should be escalated to the level of a crime. Like I said, the casino should bear some responsibility for the mistake. Even if exploiting the machine should be considered some sort of theft or cheating, what happened could be considered enticement to commit a crime that one wouldn't otherwise normally commit. That's entrapment, and that is illegal itself.

Re:Mixed feelings (1)

madcow_bg (969477) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932197)

Some responsibility you say?
Well, if they have the power to change the software, and I don't, why is it my fault that it is not working properly? Who says it is not working as intended, if I may ask?
They should bear the whole responsibility, and just swallow the losses, like they always do. Otherwise they just won't do anything about it.

Re:Mixed feelings (4, Interesting)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932437)

Who said anything about the power to change the software? If you know the software is working incorrectly (which you do, if you get $10 credit for inserting $1), and you use that fact to exploit the machine for your financial gain at the expense of the casino, then you do bear responsibility for their loss.

Think of it this way. If you walk up to an ATM and withdraw $100, and it says on your receipt that your account has been reduced by $100, but the machine actually spit out $1,000, what do you do?

A. Report to the bank that their machine is screwed up and give them back the $900.
B. Keep the whole $1,000 and go your merry way.
C. Insert your card again and take $1,000 at a time until either your account or the ATM is empty.

Option A is clearly the right answer. If you pick option B, the bank will probably drop the issue if you give back the $900. If you choose option C, which is effectively what the people did in the casino, then it's pretty likely you'll find your ass in jail for theft, which is exactly where it should be.

Re:Mixed feelings (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932549)

"Think of it this way. If you walk up to an ATM and withdraw $100, and it says on your receipt that your account has been reduced by $100, but the machine actually spit out $1,000, what do you do?

A. Report to the bank that their machine is screwed up and give them back the $900.

B. Keep the whole $1,000 and go your merry way.

C. Insert your card again and take $1,000 at a time until either your account or the ATM is empty.

Option A is clearly the right answer. If you pick option B, the bank will probably drop the issue if you give back the $900. If you choose option C, which is effectively what the people did in the casino, then it's pretty likely you'll find your ass in jail for theft, which is exactly where it should be."

I'd probably not drain the ATM, but, I'd go back periodically and try it a few more times for sure. I'd keep the money and see if they ever caught the mistake. It isn't like people take the time to count their money out of those things.

However, that being said...the difference is, that with slot machines, by design are there for you to put money into, and hope you get more money out of them.

As long as you are not messing with the machine, there is no crime here.

Re:Mixed feelings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932495)

That would be fine, if it weren't patently obvious that you were exploiting an error in the system. The first time someone put money in, it wasn't their fault. Every time after that, it was. The people abusing this machine were clearly acting in bad faith. To sum up TFA, which you clearly didn't read, people put in a dollar and got ten dollars worth of credit. The article doesn't say, but I doubt there was even any real requirement to play at all.

Re:Mixed feelings (4, Insightful)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932425)

On the other hand, if a slot machine has the fact that it costs one dollar to play prominently displayed, and you get ten dollars' worth of credit when you insert your dollar, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up.
I disagree, there are lots of scenarios that could legitimately account for the situation, two I thought of in just 30 seconds:
  1. a promotion available on multiple machines with signage about it somewhere else in the casino
  2. an 'easter egg' only mentioned in advertising - like radio commercials - designed to lure people into coming to the casino to try to hit the 'jackpot'

What makes it so reasonable to believe that the 'error' was really by design is the level of micromanagement that goes on at a typical casino. First the state is involved with highly stringent verification and validation of all electronic games of chance. Then there is the level of observation that goes on - cameras all over the place watching everybody. Then there the actual people on the floor watching everything - keeping track of who wins and who loses, deciding who to comp with free drinks, free rooms, etc.

Given all that, the chance of a broken machine lasting very long on the floor is so small that it is entirely reasonable to expect that it would be the last thing someone might expect when faced with the described behaviour. This is certainly the first time I've ever heard of such an event, despite there being hundreds of thousands of such machines in use for decades now.

Re:Good grief (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932135)

Aren't those machines state certified? It seem to me that it is the liability of whoever certified the machine, with some blame on the Casino and the machine manufacturer. Would the Casino be offering refunds if the bug worked in the other direction?

Re:Good grief (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932445)

As a former employee of a casino in Indiana (but not the one in question and not in the slot department) I can say that everything in the casino is written down and kept track of. I have seen casino tech work on machines and they routinely test them. I can only assume that what happen is that the slot tech screwed something up and they didn't test it before they let people play on the machine again.

That being said, $500,000 is less than half of what the casino I worked in made in profit per day. There's no doubt that at least some of the people who got that money just put it back in the machines anyway so I doubt they are missing much.

The state is going to step in asking why this was allowed to happen and whose fault it was. Someone will probably get transfered to a different department where they won't be allowed to screw up the machines again.

Re:Good grief (1)

jjh37997 (456473) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932137)

If you put $1 in the machine and got a $10 credit, I should think that the user would figure out that there's more going on than them just being "lucky".

Maybe not.... I've never played video slots but there are a lot of arcade games were the relationship between money and credits is not 1:1. I could see a lot of people believing that one dollar buys them ten pull of the lever on a video slot machine.

Yes and no. (3, Interesting)

Irvu (248207) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932177)

While I agree with your feelings on the oversimplified summary I question whether the Casino's loss of $500,000 matters. As a rule the systems are setup in gambling so that the Casino has an expected payoff. That is, the balance is deliberately tilted towards the operators. When the Casino loses money due to their own negligence (installing broken systems is negligent) then I find it immaterial whether they lost more or less money. I also find the idea that they should be deserving of sympathy immaterial.

Think about it this way. In a bookstore or grocery the company is negligent if they put the wrong price on something and then let it be sold as such. However obtaining items under such situations do not result in criminal prosecutions. All that a Casino gives is the chance to win more than you pay, albeit a carefully rigged chance that is not in your favor. In this case they screwed up and gave too much of a chance. The fault here should lie with the Casino not the players. It was internal negligence not external. Proving a crime on the players' part seems a little odd of an interpretation to me.

Re:Good grief (1)

imgunby (705676) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932195)

TFA also stated that the software couldn't recognize US currency. Forgive me for not showing too much sympathy for a Casino (Native American or otherwise) that failed to *test* their $MoneyMaker before letting the general public have access. I don't see how this is overly different from supermarket mis-pricing of merchandise. It goes to the consumers favor in California (at least).

imgunby

Re:Good grief (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932201)

MICHAEL
Ok! Ok! I must have, I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place
or something. Shit. I always do that. I always mess up some mundane
detail.

PETER
Oh! What is this fairly mundane detail, Michael?!!!!!

Re:Good grief (1)

LordSnooty (853791) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932215)

Wow. Since this is Slashdot I didn't RTFA and instead skipped to the FP with thoughts of "this is terrible. If the machine kept paying out wins then it's not the users' fault"

So thank you parent for actually clarifying what the story was about straight away, that the machine was not recognising currency correctly and was giving free money in the manner of a faulty ATM. Submitter, your biased summary altered the nature of my first impression entirely. If that was your intention, well done. Oh BTW, please don't submit anything again.

(Apropos of nought, why does Preview take such a long time?)

Re:Good grief (4, Insightful)

seanadams.com (463190) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932281)

If you put $1 in the machine and got a $10 credit, I should think that the user would figure out that there's more going on than them just being "lucky".

I wouldn't. When I've walked through vegas casinos some of those games look pretty freagin complicated and I wouldn't think anything of it if I got $10 credits for $1, especially with all the stupid lights and bells going off all around me. I'd probably figure there was a ratio of "game dollars" to real dollars, or something like when you put a quarter in a video game and it says "1/3" credit (because the game costs 75 cents). Why not 1/4 credit for a quarter? I wouldn't think anything of it I'd just stick some money in and play the game for a bit, and consider myself lucky if I came out with more $$ than I started. Big deal.

Also consider the fact that this was, according to TFA, a foreign machine that did not recognize dollars (anyone actually believe that?). Well if that were really the case that they couldn't even get the currency right, then I'd expect a the on-screen instructions to be poorly translated at best. It might be showing the wrong currency symbol entirely. Who knows.

One thing's for sure though: if these casinos are dumb enough to start suing their customers or trying to put them in jail, it's not going to entice a whole lot of people to take a trip to vegas... look at how well that plan worked for the music industry.

Well, yeah, but... (1)

drakaan (688386) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932313)

Also FTA:

Kathryn Ford of Louisville, Ky., the gambler who alerted the casino, said going after the other patrons was unfair.

When a slot machine jams and gamblers lose money, they don't get it back, she said.
Suppose you were there partaking of the free beverages that the casino offers, and didn't notice the discrepancy between the number of credits on the screen and the amount you put in? There are a lot of ways that you could weight things to determine whose fault it is, but in another situation, you wouldn't expect the patrons to foot the bill for the establishment's mistake.

If I give the guy at the racetrack window a ten and he gives me a ticket that says it was a $100 bet, that's not my fault. A slot machine is essentially an agent of the establishment in question, just like a dealer at a card table, or the guy at the racetrack window. They count your money and either return some of it or not, depending on the outcome of some specific circumstance. The machine counted badly, but that's not the fault of the players...maybe they should fire the machine or the machine's manager.

The casino obviously noticed the problem, and presumably has a way to prevent it from happening again other than litigation, otherwise they'll go broke from court costs. In this case, I'd have to say that the casino should suck it up, learn from the experience, and test their machines better.

Re:Good grief (1)

Derekloffin (741455) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932475)

I would say the onus of proof is on the Casino here. If they can show that said players maliciously exploited this fault (in other words they knew it was a fault and exploited it anyway), then yeah, they have a case. It is little different than if I mess with the mechanics to make it pay out excessively as in both cases I'm exploiting a fault in the system. However, if they can't show that, then I feel it is tough luck for the casino being stupid.

Re:Good grief (1)

Saxerman (253676) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932507)

If this was about a slot machine that just had a faulty hold and was giving out more money than it should, I would consider it utter bullshit. It can't possibly be the responsibility of a gambler to be aware when they're winning too much. However, that doesn't appear to be the case:

The machine at Caesars Indiana credited gamblers $10 for each dollar they inserted because the software wasn't designed for U.S. currency, state police said.

I accept that fact that knowingly using an exploit to 'win' money might be considered fraud, but you're going to have a hell of a time trying to convince me that getting extra tokens on a slot machine represents an intent on the part of the user to defraud the casino. How the heck is a user suppose to know if there isn't some kind of promotion going on, and more importantly, why would we possibly want to push the onus on the gamblers to verify that the slot machines are working correctly? If you're running a casino, it seems perfectly resonable to suggest it's your responsibility to police your own machines.

And, of course, we have this to consider too:

Kathryn Ford of Louisville, Ky., the gambler who alerted the casino, said going after the other patrons was unfair. When a slot machine jams and gamblers lose money, they don't get it back, she said. "It doesn't work in the reverse," Ford said. "They need to forget it and move on."

Re:Good grief (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932515)

I've never been to Ceasars Indiana but I did work for another Indiana casino for about 2 and a half years. As I was leaving we were in the process of switching machines from coins to bar coded pieces of paper that you would get when you "cashed out" of one machine and could put in another machine.

If Caesars has these then it is possible someone put in some of the bar codes and didn't notice how much money was on them.

It is also common for people to put a ten or twenty (or even hundred) dollar bill in the machine. If that was the case, some machines will display cents so perhaps the person mistook 10 for 1.00 or something.

Working at the casino I've seen some incredibly dumb people. I would not be surprised if half of them knew exactly what they were doing and the other half never even noticed.

'Mechanical' slot machines are computer-driven (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932533)

If you put $1 in the machine and got a $10 credit, I should think that the user would figure out that there's more going on than them just being "lucky".


Does your 'average' user even know that most 'mechanical' slot machines are computer-driven? Many posters on this forum assumed that the slot machines were video slot machines! The article doesn't even say that.

My point is this: having played slot machines before, they don't count credits in terms of '$', but in terms of 'points'. Some slot machines really do give you 10 credits (pulls) for $1 (these are called 'dime' slots).

Re:Good grief (3, Interesting)

greoff (650462) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932535)

Those charges would result in the gambler getting hauled before a judge and made to prove that he thought that he was just "lucky" when the machine gave him a $10 credit for every $1 he put in.

So, you are basically saying that these people are guilty and have to prove they are innocent?

Seems to me if they have any first year law student, they would not say a word.

  1. The plaintiff would need to prove the defendant knew the 10:1 ratio was not just because of a video game "10 plays for a dollar"
  2. The plaintiff would need to prove the defendant knew that they did not win the money (assuming they played once or twice
  3. The plaintiff would need to prove the defendant knew the video machine was not giving an award for the Xth player of the day -- 'I threw in 10 bucks, and it had $100... I thought I won a $90 bonus for being the 1,000th player of the day'
  4. The plaintiff would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a whole slew of other 'plausible' arguments

It seems to me that any decent lawyer would use any number of possible alternative explanations to shred every plaintiff witness that is called. Without calling the defendant to testify at all...

Which is the true key to this case -- it is impossible for the plaintiff to completely remove plausible doubt from all possible alternative explanations the defense could argue without examining the defendant... and the plaintiff cannot compel the defendant to testify.

It *should* be a non-starter.

Lucky (5, Funny)

PingPongBoy (303994) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932015)

I'd say it's pretty #$@$ lucky to play a slot machine with bad software.

Re:Lucky (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932387)

"A book?" said Harry as he took the rectangular parcel. "Bit of a departure
from tradition, isn't it?"
"This isn't your average book," said Ron. "It's pure gold: Twelve Fail-Safe
Ways to Charm Witches. Explains everything you need to know about girls. If
only I'd had this last year I'd have known exactly how to get rid of Lavender
and I wouldn't have known how to get going with . . .Well, Fred and George
gave me a copy, and I've learned a lot. You'd be surprised, it's not all about
wandwork, either."

Obligatory (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932023)

It's not a bug, it's a feature!

"Nothing for you to see here." (0, Offtopic)

Aurisor (932566) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932029)

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.


Don't send me to jail, I'm too young to waste away in the can!

I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (2, Interesting)

TodMinuit (1026042) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932031)

Does that mean I'm going to be charged?

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (5, Interesting)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932095)

Blackjack isn't faulty. They just keep adding more decks to make card counting impossible. If they catch you with some sort of electronic cheating device, being charged would be the best case scenario.

(They really do still work cheaters over in the back room..)

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932271)

Holy shit, stratjakt.

Don't think I've ever seen such blatant mod abuse as your case. Amazed to see -1 on your posts.

Not much else to say except best of luck...

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (1)

Mattintosh (758112) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932309)

You don't need to count cards or use a device to make better than even at blackjack. A simple set of rules is all that is needed. The probabilities of the next card being a given value and its effect on your current hand's value is all that is needed.

Easy example: The dealer is showing something from 2 to 6. You have 12 or higher. Result? Stand. There's a good chance your next card will cause you to go bust, and there's a huge chance that the dealer will have to hit (only an ace and a 6 would cause otherwise) and a similar chance as you have of him going bust. In most cases, you'll win this hand.

See? No card counting needed, no cheating needed. And you'll probably win. Just study the game and understand the probable outcomes and possible failures (yes, you can lose money) and play accordingly. Bet with your head, not with your balls. Blackjack isn't a competition against the other players at the table, only with the dealer.

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932363)

False. Counting cards is the only way to maintain an edge. You are describing "basic strategy", and you will never break even playing it alone. Do some research next time.

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (1)

GeckoX (259575) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932547)

Not true at all. Basic rules do indeed give the player an advantage, albeit, a small one.

Dealer can not decide when they hit or stand, player can. Player has the advantage right there. This has been mathematically proven. It's a tiny advantage though, and any mistake on the players part throws it out quite readily. Counting cards is done because it pushes the advantage much MUCH further towards the player.

The reason players usually lose at blackjack is because they get emotional and don't follow their rules. Since the dealer HAS to follow a strict set of rules, the instant that the player doesn't, the dealers rules end up being an advantage for the dealer.

It's really just that simple.

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932481)

This is just wrong. If you play perfect basic strategy (a slightly more advanced version of the strategy you are advocating), the house still has about a 1-2% edge. I forget the exact number. That means on average, for every $100 you bet, you will lose $1-2. In any given day if you play 100 hands, you may win or loose some hundreds of dollars but your expected value is about -$150. You have to count cards to get about the same edge against the house. The swings when counting are still pretty big.

I know Stephen Colbert advocates looking things up in your gut, but this is Slashdot man. Know what you are talking about before you speak.

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932543)

if you get caught with a machine to help count cards you wouldn't be charged with a crime because it isn't illegal. You would, however, be forced to leave and blacklisted from ever returning to that casino. (and probably any others nearby or owned by the same company).

They will just harrass and remove you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932359)

No, but if you win enough you will be harrassed by security and possibly removed from the premises without your winnings with very little legal recourse. That's one of the many reasons why I never set foot into those places.

Re:I know blackjack is faulty and will abuse it (1)

i_like_spam (874080) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932545)

Let's alter this hypothetical situation a bit:

I know the blackjack dealer is faulty and will abuse it.

For example, you walk up to a blackjack dealer who you know can't count. You hand him a $20, get $200 in chips, and then walk away. Who's at fault here?

Intent (1)

fozzmeister (160968) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932049)

Intent is the key word, IE there has to be proof of intent, if you've been looking at the schematics / rom images for that machine and your skilled at reverse engineering, then you win big, well...

If your just average joe, then no.

Re:Intent (3, Insightful)

GrayCalx (597428) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932139)

I would say that sliding in a dollar, realizing wow I can cash out for $10, and then repeating that same action umpteen times without actually using the slot machine would also qualify as intent.

Any average joe could do that.

Re:Intent (1)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932449)

Sweet, so it's like a cheat code or bug, but in real life?

Wordy responses are my wont, but this time: (1, Insightful)

Control Group (105494) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932057)

Well that's bullshit.

That's what happens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932061)

when you allow lawyers to breed.

they create shitheads like this.

If the legal profession even had the desire to not look worse than used car salesman they should be clamoring to have disbarred pieces fo shit like this.

State's Fault? (3, Informative)

MBCook (132727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932067)

OK. Isn't this why the State is supposed to certify this kind of stuff? That said, it's hard to tell. On the one hand, if you take advantage of an ATM machine, that's theft. On the other hand, the idea of a slot machine is to try to get money out of it, so if you find a way to do that (even it wasn't the way they intended) then you shouldn't get in trouble. Unless you are sticking your arm in the machine or zapping it with electricity or something else, you won. If you followed the rules (put money in, pulled levers/pushed buttons, won) then it should be yours even if the way you did it (maybe pulled level first, then hit buttons) caused it to malfunction.

Re:State's Fault? (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932161)

It may be some setting or dip switch that is off not bad software and there have been times where player lost money to casino errors and mess ups so way is criminal when it is the other way?

Re:State's Fault? (1)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932321)

Not really.

The machines on the floor can have coin comparator/bill validator problems. That's what this sounds like to me.

The state tests/certifies a single machine. Funny how there's so few game manufacturers licensed and yet it has gotten ridiculously easy to build a game. **All** of them are a low-low end pc's in a game cabinet. Some of them are dumb terminals. If there are any enterprising reporters in the ./ audience they should look the lack of licensed game manufacturers.

The only way to win... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932105)

...is not to play at all. What if I think that other machines have faulty software because I have lost all of my money? Do I have a case now if I try to bring charges against the casino?

Best editors on the planet (0, Troll)

Wrexen (151642) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932107)

Did Zonk even read the article?

Re:Best editors on the planet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932395)

Did Zonk even read the article?

Just *how* new are you here?

Cut and dry. (1)

i_like_spam (874080) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932109)

The users are at fault. For every $1 they inserted, they received $10 in credit. Unless they were blind, there is no way they could not know about this error.

Re:Cut and dry. (1)

frieko (855745) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932233)

Troll 1: Over here we have our random number generator. Troll 2: Nine Nine Nine Nine Nine Nine Nine... Dilbert: Are you sure that's random? Troll 1: There's no way to know for sure.

Re:Cut and dry. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932399)

I feel absolutely no sympathy for the casinos. They have every advantage in every game. The money they earn is basically risk-free, and only required an initial investment. If a player finds some way to tilt the odds in his favour, even without cheating, the casino will throw them out.

Now when the casino makes a blunder and loses a bit of money, they're crying to the courts over it. Take the loss, fix your mistake, shut up, and continue earning money hand-over-fist. $500k to a casino is nothing. Even casinos in smaller cities can make 4x that in a day. Fuck, if I get a parking ticket during my work day, it financially hurts me far more in comparison.

Only in America (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932111)

Only in America can someone be arrested for someone's else stupidity.

Applies to gas too? (4, Interesting)

Skevin (16048) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932125)

Here in Manhattan Beach, I found a gas station that gives me premium for $0.41/gallon. Apparently, whoever set the pump price screwed up, as the posted price was $4.09/gallon, but they don't notice because no one else at the gas station used premium. I must have gotten hundreds of dollars of free gas off that one pump so far. Does that mean I can be jailed? Just because I'm taking advantage of someone else's screwup?

Solomon

Re:Applies to gas too? (5, Insightful)

doombringerltx (1109389) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932175)

That means use cash instead of credit so you don't have to find out the answer

Re:Applies to gas too? (3, Interesting)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932191)

Does that mean I can be jailed? Just because I'm taking advantage of someone else's screwup?

Possibly. Taking advantage of someone else's screwup can be viewed as an intent to defraud. That being said, the station would be more likely to simply ask you to pay the difference. (Assuming it was a big enough deal to make a stink about, which it probably isn't.)

According to the TFA, that's what the Casino did. They asked people who abused the machine to return the winnings they'd received. Some of them complied. Some of them didn't. Those that didn't are the ones who are being considered for criminal charges. It hasn't been decided yet if the state is going to pursue the case or not.

Re:Applies to gas too? (2, Interesting)

King_TJ (85913) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932443)

It seems to me like the people who profited from this screw-up would be wise to *let* the casino haul them off to court, unless their "winnings" were so small, it's really no big deal to give them back?

I'm thinking if this *did* go to court, it would be pretty easy to settle out of court by offering to return the money THEN, vs. volunteering to give it away before it's even known if this is a case they're going to pursue.

I wouldn't normally advocate a purposeful attempt to keep money that's not rightfully yours - but as others have said, this is no ATM machine, designed to substitute for a human teller in a bank. This is a case of dumping money into a machine, supposedly for "entertainment purposes". The only reason you're giving the machine your money in the first place is with the hopes of getting more back out than you started with. It's the casino's job to control how often this actually works out for the player, and how often it doesn't.

If they installed a malfunctioning slot machine that was paying back $10 for every $1 inserted, I think the losses should really be THEIRS to eat. Eventually, these machines run out of money anyway, so there should be a maximum amount they could lose. (And if they were really STUPID enough to see the empty machine, have no record of it paying out a huge jackpot that would explain it being empty, and REFILLED it again .... well, that's REALLY looking like their own issue, isn't it?)

IMHO, it might make more sense to just send these players letters informing them that they're no longer welcome to play at their casino, unless they choose to voluntarily return the money. Let them decide if taking advantage of the opportunity is or isn't worth making it the LAST time they get to play there.

Re:Applies to gas too? (1)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932223)

Yes. You're a thief. A felon too, judging by the amount you just reported.

Re:Applies to gas too? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932287)

what station and pump is it? :D

Re:Applies to gas too? (1)

jkerman (74317) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932293)

Before you call this guy a thief, be sure to check your states accuracy in pricing laws. Particularly as they apply to electronic systems.

Re:Applies to gas too? (1)

cakkafracle (969984) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932385)

its completely effing wrong to not report it, he's being a selfish ass and I won't be surprised if he gets charged with some sort of theivery offence.
that being said, I'd probably do the same thing.

How about groceries? (1)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932555)

I've seen the most screwups when checking out of grocery stores.

Of course, in thoses cases, it's typically in the store's favor, it seems, but there have been times when the price rung up is a few cents less than what it said on the shelves. (of course, the last one I actually noticed was in the stores's favor, not mine, and I wasn't willing to wait around for a price check)

Machines not designed for US currency??? (5, Insightful)

SoCalChris (573049) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932143)

FTFA: The machine at Caesars Indiana credited gamblers $10 for each dollar they inserted because the software wasn't designed for U.S. currency, state police said. More than two dozen people played the machine before one gambler alerted Caesars employees.

If Caesars was so negligent that they put out machines not designed for US currency without testing them or having their vendor test them, then they deserve to lose the money.

Re:Machines not designed for US currency??? (1)

Radon360 (951529) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932391)

not designed for US currency

That in and of itself begs the question whether Ceasars had installed a gaming machine that wasn't compliant with whatever gaming administrative codes were in force. I wonder if the government agency that oversees gambling in Indiana ever wrote them a citation for this.

In the end, though, two wrongs still don't make a right.

Re:Machines not designed for US currency??? (0)

AxemRed (755470) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932427)

They may deserve to lose money for being negligent, but that doesn't mean that the people who exploited the slot machine didn't commit a criminal act.

Consider this... A woman walks down the street in a bad part of town carrying a clear bag full of money. Someone robs her. Did she deserve to lose her money? Probably. Does the person who robbed her deserve to be charged with with a crime? Yes.

Re:Machines not designed for US currency??? (1)

can56 (698639) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932441)

Out of curiosity, what currency was the machine designed for? Canadian dollars, rubles, sheckles, pesos, dinars, euros, ..., or what?

Re:Machines not designed for US currency??? (1)

VidEdit (703021) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932503)

If it wasn't designed for US currency, it should have rejected the US currency, coins or cards inserted as being improper. The casino was negligent.

Whatever the case it is a **gambling** machine so I have a hard time sympathizing with the gambling machine's owner for loosing money. They gambled on a defective machine and lost.

As per the FA, I bet that if they ever found a machine that had only been giving 10 cents credit for every dollar that they would have tracked down the players and given them full refunds...

We don't need no stinking testing (3, Insightful)

pauljuno (998497) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932149)

I find it hard to fathom that a casino would install a slot machine without even testing it. You would think the first thing they would do is verify that the machine accepts money and giving it a whirl. I'm sure they have some way of doing this in a test mode to verify it's functioning. I'm not condoning the people who took advantage of the situation, they should return the money. But sheesh, who does the casino have to blame but for themselves?

abusing a bug in the system (1)

hajus (990255) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932151)

This is analagous to abusing a bug in the system for personal gain. The money gained illegally is just camoflaged by the fact that it is supposed to give money at random times. I'm with the prosecutors on this one. If people that know their are bugs (hypothetically) and abuse them to get money from a bank machine should be sent to jail, so should people who do this on gambling machines (instead of reporting the bug).

refund, yes; jail, no (1)

paladinwannabe2 (889776) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932429)

The machine was buggy, the people knew it, they need to return the money when asked. There was no fraud (which usually involves jail time). It's as if there was an ATM that displayed 'press here to get $9'. Naturally people would press it... a few thousand times. Those people should be forced to return the money, but jail time for something like that is ridiculous. It's not as if the casino operators go to jail if a 'bug' makes them more money than they expected, so why should their customers?

Slashdot is losing money ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932163)

because editors get paid for doing nothing.

"The machine at Caesars Indiana credited gamblers $10 for each dollar they inserted ..."

the machine was not giving out more wins, it was multiplying money 10x with 100% probability. the users could clearly see that.

Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?"
hell yeah!

while pressing criminal charges sounds unreasonable, "lucky" ones are not innocent either.

"Average User"? (0)

R2.0 (532027) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932169)

"Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?"

Kind of like when the A Lottery was rigged back in the 70's/80's. There was a record payout on the combo "666". Why? Because rumor got around to play sixes and fours.

Word gets out when gamblers figure out something is going on. Assuming the software was actually faulty and not rigged, my guess is that it took about an hour for word to get out that machine x was paying out WAY over the average, and then folks flocked to it.

Can they be prosecuted? Doubt it - how does the state prove that someone acted on a rumor with intent to defraud.

Should they be prosecuted? Maybe, depending on the level of sophistication.

Think of the case of the armored car whose door popped open and someone grabbed the cash (also in PA IIRC). All tehy did was grab up cash on the street, but they knew full well it was someone elses money and that something was wrong with what they did.

I'm just surprised (3, Funny)

niceone (992278) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932181)

I'm just surprised that increasing their chances by 10x was enough to give the customers an edge!

Re:I'm just surprised (2, Insightful)

Radon360 (951529) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932467)

Go back and RTFA a little closer.

Step 1: Player inserts $1
Step 2: Machine indicates the player has ten bets (i.e. $10)
Step 3: Player cashes out and recieves $10
Step 4: Go to step 1 and repeat until the player gets paranoid about being caught.

You see, the process really didn't involve any gambling at all, except being caught.

Re:I'm just surprised (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932493)

You can simply put money in, and pull credit back out...

So I put a dollar in, I get 10 credit, so I put 100 dollars in, I get 1000 credit...

see? I don't have to actually PLAY, I can just add and cash out.

Entrapment? (2, Insightful)

amigabill (146897) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932203)

So, you make a defective product and then put it out for public use without telling anyone it's defective, and probably even deny it for quite a while, and then sue everyone who uses this publically accessible product thing? Sounds like the operator is guilty of entrapment.

Even the editors don't RTFA (3, Interesting)

davmoo (63521) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932207)

Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?

When all the average Joe had to do was insert a dollar to get back $10 or $20, as in *no* game play at all, that's not "luck", that's "a stupid idiot who thinks he can rip off a casino".

If someone came up to a machine, and stuck a buck in and got back $10 without doing anything *or knowing the situation* and only did it once, I'd say the casino needs to suck it up and eat it.

But when people are lining up and (some of them) shoving $100 in to get $1000 out, that's not "luck" or "the way it goes", that's called "theft". And those who knowingly did it need to be knowingly prosecuted and knowingly be required to knowingly pay the piper.

2 sides (1)

blhack (921171) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932229)

Well, lets assume that you walk past an ATM that is spitting out thousands of dollars in money. If you grab a bag and fill 'er up, should you really be entitled to the money? Granted, yes the bank is liable for this (for using a product with faulty software), but i doubt there is anybody dumb enough to state, in good conscience, that they think the money should be theirs because they got "lucky".

Re:2 sides (1)

Isaac-1 (233099) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932463)

That is true, but what happens with that same ATM gives you an extra $20 when you press the "fast $200" button. Does it matter if you counted the money dispensed or not? What if it shorts you and only hands out $180? Whats your time worth having to make a special trip back to the bank to return the $20, or the time you spend on hold on the phone reporting it?

Ike

i want to find one. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932241)

i remember seeing a story about a guy named ronald dale harris. long story short he was a guy that was high up gaming control board and supposed to be making the slot machines secure against a user compromising / altering them for higher payouts. he ended up writing his own version of the embedded software that runs the slot machines and flashing it to several different machines in vegas. it worked something along these lines. if you just played the machine normally youd almost never see the benefit of the modified software, but, if you did thing in a particular order youd jackpot every time. like, for instance; put 1 coin in. bet one row, spin. put 2 coins in, bet one row, spin. put 1 coin in, bet one row, jackpot.

he ended up getting busted because he was more of a computer nerd than a criminal. (he discovered the random number generator used for keno wasnt exactly random, but, he couldnt play it because employees are barred from playing. he had a friend that would do it for him, but the dumbasses stayed in the same room and used their real names. brilliant?)

whenever i go to harrahs, i try various weird combinations in different machines (wheel of fortune progressive ftw.)

if i ever do find a glitched machine, youd better bet your ass ill exploit it. how many billions of people a year do the casinos exploit? yeah yeah, i know, its their choice what they do to themselves- but i never saw anyone defend a drug dealer by saying it was his clients fault for doing drugs. addiction is addiction. 'you can find your crack in all sorts of things'.

Gambletron 2000 (1)

fohat (168135) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932249)

They should have invested in Professor Frink's Gambletron 2000 [couchpotatotrivia.com] . Then none of this would have occurred.

Professor Frink, Professor Frink! He'll make you laugh, He'll make you think...

The problem with "Credits" (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932253)

If the machine had been loaded with real money and dropped real tokens, the casino would have noticed the problem much sooner.

This is the same problem with people using credit cards instead of using cash.

Bad move from the casino (1, Redundant)

ElGanzoLoco (642888) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932257)

The Slashdot blurb is not very accurate. Makes it sound like the gamblers wouldn't notice the fault. Instead, the machine credited the players $10 each time $1 was inserted, according TFA. So the gamblers can't claim they didn't know the machine was faulty.

Still, I think it's the responsibility of the casino to ensure the machines are working correctly. This is just like having an ATM spewing $100 bills at random, and expecting people to not take the money.

I also think the casino is also doing a very bad, very dumb move by publicizing the issue. They lost close to 500,000 (small change for a casino) and want it back. But now the press is all over how Caesars Indiana is considering suing its patrons because their own machines failed - definetely high potential for PR damage.

(Once, I put 1.5 euros in an automatic vending machine. The machine gave me my coffee, and returned 2 euros, which I obviously kept. Should the owner of the machine sue me?)

Re:Bad move from the casino (1)

fohat (168135) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932365)

(Once, I put 1.5 euros in an automatic vending machine. The machine gave me my coffee, and returned 2 euros, which I obviously kept. Should the owner of the machine sue me?)

The authorities have now been informed and you must report immediately back to that vending machine and leave the 2 euros on the top for reclamation. They also wanted me to tell you, "Don't let it happen again."

Re:Bad move from the casino (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19932497)

They lost close to 500,000 (small change for a casino) and want it back.
Is $500K really small change for a casino? I would think that any business would want that back.

Re:Bad move from the casino (1)

StormReaver (59959) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932501)

I think the casino is just out of luck. They have to prove that the players knew the machine was faulty, which is practically impossible to do in circumstances like these. Is getting more than you put in supposed to indicate fault? What about all of those X-for-one offers merchants frequently run in order to get customers? I would simply claim that I thought it was a casino promotion. Considering the staggering amounts of money casinos routinely lift from patrons, a 10-for-1 offer for one day at such a lavishly expensive place wouldn't even seem the slightest bit out of place. I would just be happy that I happened into the casino on the day the promotion was in effect.

Was there an "out of order" sign on the machine? If there was, did any patron remove it? No on both counts? Too bad for the casino.

Apt anology (1)

Dusty00 (1106595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932261)

So whoever gained from the malfunction is responsible provided they were involved in implementing the technology.

Hence, if the machines were faulty the casino would be responsible and would have to give back anything they gained due to the fault.

So what of these politicians hell bent on using voting machines and resisting any attempt at creating an audit trail?

Countersuit (2, Insightful)

PhoenixHack (1032194) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932267)

Prosecutors are considering criminal charges agains casino houses who won big on games involving people who have faulty perceptions of their chances of winning ...

Send the prosecutors to jail (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932295)

...for being dim-wittedly negligent in their public service, and for endangering the public with their stupidity.

Seriously though: Why are people like this given power?

Whoa, there... (4, Insightful)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932323)

It's the responsibilty of the vendor to verify the systems are in compliance. If the error is in favor of the consumer, then there should be no recourse; if the error is in favor of the house then it's false advertising and the consumer is entitled to compensation. The house has control over all aspects of the game; the player has none. Imho, its similar to a contract: if one party writes the contract, then any errors therein are generally adjudicated in favor of the non-writing party.

Casinos are the rare exception to simple rules like this: anyone caught playing by the rules and winning too much is prosecuted, hence the prohibition against car counting in blackjack, which is simply smart play. They give you sheets to keep track of roulette spins, and will let you make notes on dice throws all day long.

To put it in simpler terms: You cut the cake, your brother chooses which piece. If you're the one cutting the cake, don't get pissed if your brother chooses the bigger half.

Malfunction voids all plays and pays. (4, Interesting)

isaac (2852) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932325)

If you put $10 into this slot machine and it gave you $1 in credit, you'd be up shit creek. If you put $100 in and it gave you $0 credit, you'd be lucky to get the casino to comp your breakfast because you're sure as hell not getting $100 back.

!sympathy here.

--Yahoo-- is not suing anyone (5, Insightful)

Torodung (31985) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932327)

The summary says (or hopefully said after it is revised):

Yahoo has a new option: perhaps the users are criminally liable for using the software.
"Yahoo News" is the website carrying an Associated Press article about a Caesars casino in Indiana.

Harrison County, Indiana is the legal entity considering criminal charges against players, probably at the behest of Caesar's.

I find the summary wording to be at least misleading, if not defamatory.

Beyond that, from TFA, the machine was crediting ten dollars for every dollar inserted, not paying out with more wins. It was clearly, demonstrably, and obviously faulty. So the answer to the question "Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?" is yes. They knew damned well they were getting $10 worth of chances for every $1. It was as obvious as finding that someone had left their wallet at the machine and pocketing it.

What the heck is going on here editors? This summary is beyond shoddy.

--
Toro

Casinos win these battles all the time (3, Interesting)

netbuzz (955038) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932349)

It wasn't that long ago that the author of Microsoft Word was banned from a bunch of casinos (temporarily) for what he described as being too lucky at video poker.

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/17709 [networkworld.com]

Caesars (1)

Mockylock (1087585) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932357)

Less than a half a million is chump change to them, considering how much they rip people off every day. The one time they screw up and actually give money away in someone else's favor, they send them to jail.

Something stinks here. (1)

Whuffo (1043790) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932461)

Let's see now; the casino places a faulty machine into service. Whose fault is that? They lost money on the games played on this machine. Whose fault is that?

There's quite a few responses here that say that the player saw a way to take advantage of the rules of play and proceeded to do so. I'd like to submit that the casinos make a regular practice of knowing the rules of play for every game in their inventory and use that knowledge to insure that the customers will consistently lose money. So if the casino fixes the game so that you lose it's just business as usual. But if the casino fixes the game so that you win then you're stealing from the casino? What kind of twisted logic is this?

Keep in mind that the players did not break the machine - they simply played the machine using the rules and conditions that the casino programmed into it. If the casino made a mistake in the programming, that's the casino's problem. If they lost money, that's just one of the risks of doing business.

What's happened is that they've created a system where the casinos are virtually guaranteed to make money. They rig the games so that the casino always comes out ahead - and as long as you lose when you play then everything is peachy. But if you win consistently you'll find that they don't consider it to be a game at all. Especially if you find and exploit a flaw in one of their games; not just things like a badly programmed slot machine, but things like counting cards at the blackjack table. They'll turn you over to the law and press for charges for your attempt to play their games by THE SAME RULES that the casino uses.

Does anyone here seriously think that observing the action on a casino game and adjusting your play style to take maximum advantage of the possibilities presented is a crime?

Gaming Practice and Law (5, Informative)

Protonk (599901) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932487)

The Nevada Gaming Commission [nv.gov] [PDF] (As an example, I know the article isn't about Las Vegas) heavily regulates slot machines, their software, and their payout schedule. Machines that deviate from the payout schedule are inspected and machines whose software processes are not open to inspection and audit are not allowed on the floor. In this case it would be, prima facia, a crime to install software that was not audited by the authorities onto a machine. IANAL, so I can't tell you if proving criminal intent would be required, but I suspect that the threshold would be minimal, assuming that it could be proven that the users inserted the bug.

In this case, it doesn't appear as though the bug was inserted by the users, just (sigh) exploited in order to win. These cases are well litigated in Nevada (though probably not in Indiana/Kentucky), and elsewhere. The trend seems to be [gaminglawmasters.com] (Scroll Down to "Overpayment to Patron") that if it can be proven that the gaming patron didn't involve him or herself in the actual flaw of the machine, then not only are they not liable, but the Casino must still pay out the winnings.

Don't care (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932511)

I have little sympathy for casino operators. It's their job to avoid hemorrhaging money, which according to the huge profits they have been raking in, they have been quite successful.

As for people being able to tell the difference between a faulty machine and lucky, I can't say with certainty that even a majority of the gamblers at a casino are rational intellectual people. I've found many gamblers are extremely superstitious and it seems possible to me that people playing a slot machine can actually believe they are lucky.

for the record I hate video slots. if it doesn't have gears and go "clunk clunk clunk" when you pull the lever, then it just ain't got no class.
--
I believe RTFA is bad luck.

more importantly (1)

superwiz (655733) | more than 7 years ago | (#19932559)

Is the intent here criminal? All they are doing is entering into a business transaction that the other party has agreed to. Is putting money into a bank account that pays too high an interest also criminal?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?