Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 "Did LL reply to the proverbial question: How does our lawyer provide required documentation for games that have not been approved yet?" Sorry LL doesn't have an official policy on common sense. I searched google for Chicken and the egg and just came up with Sion eggs, a chicken and egg script license and a chicken choking egg blaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 "Presumably you can describe the game to your lawyer. You know how it works and what the rules are." He can't describe a game that is on LL's approved game list to a lawyer when there are no games currently on said list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Vladi Hazelnut wrote: just having the game be skill driven does not include it in "skill gaming" It clearly states that any game that is NOT pay to play is not covered by this. Quite simply is what this says is any game that requires you to pay in and at the end pays out is not allowed. If it is based on skill it will have to be registered, if it based on luck it is gambling and is already not allowed. After this policy takes effect it is allowed once the game designer has it approved as a game of skill. Also the way its written it can be interpreted as any game you pay in is not allowed, any game that pays in is not allowed, and any game that pays in AND pays out is not allowed. The policy was exceptionally poorly written unless semi colons have new meaning as words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Perrie Juran wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Marishka Ixito wrote: Having read through most posts in the thread, my impression is that many people think LindenLabs will choose an active role when judging what games qualify to be run in a gaming region, and thus kill off those games that are the most popular now because they resemble "gambling" the most, thus creating an opportunity for more truely skill based games to be operated in sl. I very much doubt LL will take that route. I'm inclined to agree with that. The policy itself states that, "Linden Lab reserves the right, but not the obligation, to monitor and enforce this Skill Gaming Policy." I underlined the relevant words. It does give the impression that this is about them getting things into compliance with legalities, rather than them wanting to crack down on anything. I can hear them now: "If we're gonna have to set things up to comply with legalities, we might as well get some money back for the effort." Hence the fees. I said way back in this thread that I didn't think LL would be making judgement, that it was more of a case of people "self certifying." But I also do not think they will be "rubber stamping" the applications either, same way that they say they don't "rubber stamp" DMCA notices. My guess is these documents will be vetted by Attorneys and they don't come cheap. Because this is being done to comply with a lot of legal issues, if they just rubber stamp the applications then their actions would be looked at as a facade. All of this is being done to bring them into compliance. Still, I do get a kick out of one phrase in the FAQ: "A reasoned legal opinion from a credible attorney....." Is that an oxymoron? If the DMCA comes from outside SL they rubberstamp DMCA notices like most websites do. DMCA's are often abused and used as a form of censorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Aethelwine wrote: If the gambling takes place avatar to avatar then I doubt it would need to be covered by a TOS any more than any other communication system would... telephones, email, postal service etc etc It would be covered. If people start having big poker games in SL where they are just paying manually they would crack down on it if it was reported. Just it is harder to catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Sorina Garrigus wrote: "You own a gaming sim? Didn't you know that gambling hasn't been allowed in SL for years? But you did know, and you chose to break the rules." You have no clue what your talking about there is a policy on wagering not gambling per say. Games of chance have not been allowed in SL for years. Games of skill always have been allowed and is clearly stated right on the wagring policy. Additionally LL has been very aware of games of skill such as all the slingo variants since 2007. Its impossible not to and they actively allowed them and even had a secret white list of games that were ok. " Gambling is strictly prohibited in Second". Those are the very first words of the blog post about the new policy. Notice that is says "gambling". I think I do have " a clue what I'm talking about" A secret white list? What's secret about it if you know it exists? But yes, I do know that skill games have been allowed since the gambling ban. It's just that when someone says they have a gaming sim, it's generally understood that gaming is gambling, as in 'online gaming'. Do a search in Google on the word 'gaming'. You'll see all the online casinos come up, using the phrase 'online gaming'. That quote does not appear in the link to the TOS you had nor the new skill game policy. So yes you may have a clue what your talking about but when people declare something that is known to them to be clearly untrue it is refered to as a lie. Games of pure chance are prohibited in Second Life but games of skill never were. From the policy you linked but never read ... "This policy only applies to wagering games that involve an element of chance. This includes, for instance, any game involving random number generation, simulated dice, cards, poker, lotteries, bingo, or any other "chance" game. Games of pure intellectual or physical skill, such as puzzles or other skill contests, may not fall under this definition." Additionally the new policy is about licensing games of skill declaring "Skill Gaming is coming to Second Life". The LL poster is 7 years behind the times. I am aware of a lot of things as they relate to games in SL much more than most. But years ago a there was a game I forget which that LL had issues with. It was sent back and the Linden said it was because it was not on "the white list" and recommended to use such games. This Linden must have been new and wasn't aware the list was not public. A lot of games have been white listed in SL for years and years but that list has never been made public. But this new policy not only will require games to go through various red tapes but the new white list will be made public for game operators to reference and pick from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: "Presumably you can describe the game to your lawyer. You know how it works and what the rules are." He can't describe a game that is on LL's approved game list to a lawyer when there are no games currently on said list. No, but he's trying to get a game approved, surely? Why else is he consulting his lawyer? Presumably he's reasonably familiar with the game he is trying to get approved and how you play it, and what skills are required to win it, and can explain all this to his lawyer. How else is he going to create the affidavit attesting to the facts as set out in the lawyer's reasoned opinion? I don't understand what the problem is supposed to be. Or, rather, I can understand wanting to wait until the creator has managed to get the game approved, in case LL don't approve it, but otherwise I don't see the difficulty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Marishka Ixito wrote: Innula Zenovka wrote: I have to say that, as a native speaker of British English (and as someone who is used to reading English legal documents), it didn't occur to me to interpret '“Skill Game” refers to any game: 1) whose outcome is determined by skill and is not contingent, in whole or in material part, upon chance; 2) requires or permits the payment of Linden Dollars to play; 3) provides a payout in Linden Dollars; and 4) is legally authorized by applicable United States and international law.' as meaning anything other than that all four requirements must be met, as opposed to any one of them, until I saw your posts on the subject. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of course you are right, there's no reasonable option to interprete the given definition in any other way. All four requirements must be met. The only escape I see is in the bit you left out, "game, implemented through an Inworld object:" Unless avatars count as an "in-world object", pay to play games that offer monetary prizes could still be implemented through direct payment to an avatar. I would suggest to LindenLabs to include "and/or bot" in its definition of skill games that are subject to the new regulation if they want to cover their loophole ass a bit more. That said, I doubt we'll see a witch hunt to kill everything with L$ prizes outside gaming regions. I fully expect clubs / venues that accept donations and offer free to play beauty contests / races / whatever with L$ prizes will be left in peace. Moreover, games that use other (virtual or not) currencies than L$ are not a worry for LindenLabs. Stuff like that operates outside of SL and thus is and should be a legal worry for the operator of such games, they can't hide under SL's gaming umbrella. . From the wagering policy "Any real-world currency OR THING OF VALUE" This is not a new "loophole" this is something that is used in Japan when playing Pachniko. They win a prize and walk across the street to a separate store that "buys" it for cash. This is why the policy and most laws on games of chance use the phrase "or thing of value". In SL terms if a object is won it may possibly be ok for non transfer objects that cant be sold otherwise there would be Chucky Cheese style casinos now with a little store across the street that buys teddy bears etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Marishka Ixito wrote: Having read through most posts in the thread, my impression is that many people think LindenLabs will choose an active role when judging what games qualify to be run in a gaming region, and thus kill off those games that are the most popular now because they resemble "gambling" the most, thus creating an opportunity for more truely skill based games to be operated in sl. I very much doubt LL will take that route. I'm inclined to agree with that. The policy itself states that, "Linden Lab reserves the right, but not the obligation, to monitor and enforce this Skill Gaming Policy." I underlined the relevant words. It does give the impression that this is about them getting things into compliance with legalities, rather than them wanting to crack down on anything. I can hear them now: "If we're gonna have to set things up to comply with legalities, we might as well get some money back for the effort." Hence the fees. I think the "Linden Lab reserves the right, but not the obligation, to monitor and enforce this Skill Gaming Policy" statement is LL's way of getting out of having to hire if not reduce members of the governence team. The whole policy will make less work and cost for LL to deal with games because if they are not on the list they just boot them. LL is trying to distance themselves from games which is why all the legal opinions being required so they can have a more plausible deniablity than they have had in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Innula Zenovka wrote: Sorina Garrigus wrote: "Presumably you can describe the game to your lawyer. You know how it works and what the rules are." He can't describe a game that is on LL's approved game list to a lawyer when there are no games currently on said list. No, but he's trying to get a game approved, surely? Why else is he consulting his lawyer? Presumably he's reasonably familiar with the game he is trying to get approved and how you play it, and what skills are required to win it, and can explain all this to his lawyer. How else is he going to create the affidavit attesting to the facts as set out in the lawyer's reasoned opinion? I don't understand what the problem is supposed to be. Or, rather, I can understand wanting to wait until the creator has managed to get the game approved, in case LL don't approve it, but otherwise I don't see the difficulty. His post was ... "How does our lawyer provide required documentation for games that have not been approved yet" He is a potential game operator not a game creator or in regards to his question he is. He is asking about games that have not been approved yet. Both Game creators and game operators are required to get legal opinions on their activities and games in question. The difficulty is an attourney can't given opinions on their clients activities as a skill game operator without knowing the games in question. The games an operator has access to on their sim have to go through an approval process by the game creator who also has to get legal opinions. Game operators are stuck and not likely will be able to do much of anything until there are games to pick from that are approved as games of skill. For all we know the current games that are out there may or may not have to be modified to fit in as a game of skill so his attorney isn't going to offer an opinion on something sight unseen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Sorina Garrigus wrote: "You own a gaming sim? Didn't you know that gambling hasn't been allowed in SL for years? But you did know, and you chose to break the rules." You have no clue what your talking about there is a policy on wagering not gambling per say. Games of chance have not been allowed in SL for years. Games of skill always have been allowed and is clearly stated right on the wagring policy. Additionally LL has been very aware of games of skill such as all the slingo variants since 2007. Its impossible not to and they actively allowed them and even had a secret white list of games that were ok. " Gambling is strictly prohibited in Second". Those are the very first words of the blog post about the new policy. Notice that is says "gambling". I think I do have " a clue what I'm talking about" A secret white list? What's secret about it if you know it exists? But yes, I do know that skill games have been allowed since the gambling ban. It's just that when someone says they have a gaming sim, it's generally understood that gaming is gambling, as in 'online gaming'. Do a search in Google on the word 'gaming'. You'll see all the online casinos come up, using the phrase 'online gaming'. I randomly found the quote you quoted. It is in the section entitled Skill Gaming Approved Participants. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official**Only uploaded images may be used in postings**://secondlife.i.lithium.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-frustrated.gif" border="0" alt=":smileyfrustrated:" title="Smiley Frustrated" />econd_Life_Skill_Gaming_Approved_Participants you clearly had to dig to find that poorly written wiki. The skill gaming policy is almost as poorly written. The poster does not understand what the word gamble means. They clearly wrote it as if the word is only ever used in relations to games of pure chance. When they said gambling, they meant to say games of chance, otherwise the rest completely contradicts other new policies, the wagering policy, and itself. But if you read it all in context which clearly you didn't want people to read or discover it says the following. Gambling is strictly prohibited in Second Life and operating, or participating in, a game of chance that provides a Linden Dollar payout is a violation of our Terms of Service. However, games of skill are legally permitted in many jurisdictions, and Second Life’s Skill Gaming Policy establishes that skill games offering Linden Dollar payouts will be allowed, but each game, its creator, its operator, and the region on which it is operated must be approved by Linden Lab. Additionally, access to skill games offering Linden Dollar payouts will be limited to Second Life users who are of sufficient age and are located in a jurisdiction that Linden Lab permits for this type of online gaming activity. For more information on this program, please read the Skill Gaming Policy and associated FAQs. There is enough legit confusion without you spreading BS out there like a common place troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: His post was ... "How does our lawyer provide required documentation for games that have not been approved yet" He is a potential game operator not a game creator or in regards to his question he is. He is asking about games that have not been approved yet. Both Game creators and game operators are required to get legal opinions on their activities and games in question. The difficulty is an attourney can't given opinions on their clients activities as a skill game operator without knowing the games in question. The games an operator has access to on their sim have to go through an approval process by the game creator who also has to get legal opinions. Game operators are stuck and not likely will be able to do much of anything until there are games to pick from that are approved as games of skill. For all we know the current games that are out there may or may not have to be modified to fit in as a game of skill so his attorney isn't going to offer an opinion on something sight unseen. I'm sorry, but I can't see what the difficulty is. The would-be operator describes to the attorney how the game works, how it's played, and so on. He'd better understand all that, since that's the basis of the affidavit he's going to swear. The attorney says, "Based on what you've told me, it's my opinion that what you've described is a game of skill, because.... " Why does the lawyer need to wait for what LL have to say? He's got all the information he needs from the would-be operator. If he's operating the game already, he must think it's a game of skill, surely? Otherwise, what's he doing operating something he thinks is against the ToS and has been for the last 7 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhataBig Camel Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Exactly Sonia. And why would anyone pay a lawyer to provide documentation for a game that may not be approved - money down the drain imo. We're talking one document per game here not a blanket opinion to cover all games. So it would make sense to wait until a game is approved before applying. In the meanwhile, the sim sits empty but tiers still have to be paid pending approval because who knows how long it will take for the creators to get their games approved. Either that or give up the sim and then buy another when it makes sense to apply. More expenses. So we just go around in circles. And no "credible" lawyer would put his credibility on the line for a game that is pie in the sky right now. Just an INcredible one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Innula Zenovka wrote: Sorina Garrigus wrote: His post was ... "How does our lawyer provide required documentation for games that have not been approved yet" He is a potential game operator not a game creator or in regards to his question he is. He is asking about games that have not been approved yet. Both Game creators and game operators are required to get legal opinions on their activities and games in question. The difficulty is an attourney can't given opinions on their clients activities as a skill game operator without knowing the games in question. The games an operator has access to on their sim have to go through an approval process by the game creator who also has to get legal opinions. Game operators are stuck and not likely will be able to do much of anything until there are games to pick from that are approved as games of skill. For all we know the current games that are out there may or may not have to be modified to fit in as a game of skill so his attorney isn't going to offer an opinion on something sight unseen. I'm sorry, but I can't see what the difficulty is. The would-be operator describes to the attorney how the game works, how it's played, and so on. He'd better understand all that, since that's the basis of the affidavit he's going to swear. The attorney says, "Based on what you've told me, it's my opinion that what you've described is a game of skill, because.... " Why does the lawyer need to wait for what LL have to say? He's got all the information he needs from the would-be operator. If he's operating the game already, he must think it's a game of skill, surely? Otherwise, what's he doing operating something he thinks is against the ToS and has been for the last 7 years? ??? The would be operator describes an approved game to his attorney that is not yet approved and you don't see the difficulty? Ray Charles can see the difficulty. He can't describe a game he doesn't even have the name of the so called approved game let alone a description. Client: "Hi I want you so send a letter to Linden Labs about a skill game business and the games within it that its ok for me to do so" Attorney: "Sure, what is the name and description of the games in question and I will get right on it." Client: "I don't have the names of the games or descriptions because there is nothing on the approved games list. you clearly don't understand the process which is understandable. The game creators have to have the games approved first with legal opinions etc. LL will have a list of games that went through the approval process which the game operators are to choose from. The operators have to choose through a list of games that went through the approval process but there are no games listed for this as of yet. Creators Should you wish to create a Skill Game for use in Second Life, you represent and agree that you: (i) have received, and paid for, a Creator License from Linden Lab through the Skill Gaming application process; (ii) will only offer Skill Games that have been approved by Linden Lab through the Skill Gaming application process; (iii) will abide by, and remain in full compliance with, the Skill Gaming Program Terms and Conditions; and (iv) will maintain accurate, current and complete information about yourself and your Skill Games through your Second Life account and the Skill Gaming application process. Each Creator shall:Ensure that “[slgaming]” will be included as a prefix in the root object name field of each Skill Game; Ensure that the “llTransferLindenDollars” Linden Scripting Language function will be used for all outgoing Linden Dollar transactions for each Skill Game; and Verify that each purchaser of its approved Skill Games has been approved by Linden Lab as an Operator through the Skill Gaming application process. Linden Lab will maintain a list of Operators. If you fail to satisfy any of these requirements, your Skill Games will not be permitted for placement on any Skill Gaming Regions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 WhataBig Camel wrote: Exactly Sonia. And why would anyone pay a lawyer to provide documentation for a game that may not be approved - money down the drain imo. We're talking one document per game here not a blanket opinion to cover all games. So it would make sense to wait until a game is approved before applying. In the meanwhile, the sim sits empty but tiers still have to be paid pending approval because who knows how long it will take for the creators to get their games approved. Either that or give up the sim and then buy another when it makes sense to apply. More expenses. So we just go around in circles. And no "credible" lawyer would put his credibility on the line for a game that is pie in the sky right now. Just an INcredible one! I can't say this is completely accruate but a couple game operators that applied for operation status were told by LL that they will be allowed to continue to operate during the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irihapeti Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: ...Some sploder makers have made bogus claims of legal sploders because they came up with some algorithm that doesn't use a random number generator and each player wins something. ... have seen that argument used other times the argument goes: We dont use a PRNG algo. We use a pre-determined arrangement to award prizes/winnings is nonsense this argument a PRNG is a pre-determined arrangement. If it wasnt then would be a RNG (random number generator) and is no such thing + the goal of a pre-determined arrangement (whether is stored in a datatable or generated by an algo) is to make the outcome at each step/toss/spin/turn appear random to the observer (person playing the game) random/chance isnt defined by the mechanics/code. Random/chance is defined by the ability/difficulty of the observer to predict the next value in the arrangement the designer of the arrangement (wether table or algo) knows exactly what the next value will be every time. knowable in O(n) time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaia Gabe Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Quote: His post was ... "How does our lawyer provide required documentation for games that have not been approved yet" He is a potential game operator not a game creator or in regards to his question he is. He is asking about games that have not been approved yet. Both Game creators and game operators are required to get legal opinions on their activities and games in question. The difficulty is an attourney can't given opinions on their clients activities as a skill game operator without knowing the games in question. The games an operator has access to on their sim have to go through an approval process by the game creator who also has to get legal opinions. Game operators are stuck and not likely will be able to do much of anything until there are games to pick from that are approved as games of skill. For all we know the current games that are out there may or may not have to be modified to fit in as a game of skill so his attorney isn't going to offer an opinion on something sight unseen. I totally agree, my attorney agree . Why LL is no more answering to this post? Why LL is not answering to support tickets about this new policy (including tickets sent by concierge)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Kenbro Utu wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: ETA: In the past I've understood that the semi-colon is the hardest punctuation mark to use correctly, because we, in general, don't know how to use it. The semicolon is basically a glorified comma, nothing else. The semicolon is used in this paragraph (correctly) to divide items in the list because one of the items itself (item #1) contains commas. The semicolon is there simply to clearly divide the specific items the same as a comma would. That a very useful piece of information, Kenbro. Thank you for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Perrie Juran wrote: Kenbro Utu wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: ETA: In the past I've understood that the semi-colon is the hardest punctuation mark to use correctly, because we, in general, don't know how to use it. The semicolon is basically a glorified comma, nothing else. The semicolon is used in this paragraph (correctly) to divide items in the list because one of the items itself (item #1) contains commas. The semicolon is there simply to clearly divide the specific items the same as a comma would. http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon That a great page, Perrie. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: ??? The would be operator describes an approved game to his attorney that is not yet approved and you don't see the difficulty? Ray Charles can see the difficulty. He can't describe a game he doesn't even have the name of the so called approved game let alone a description. Client: "Hi I want you so send a letter to Linden Labs about a skill game business and the games within it that its ok for me to do so" Attorney: "Sure, what is the name and description of the games in question and I will get right on it." Client: "I don't have the names of the games or descriptions because there is nothing on the approved games list. you clearly don't understand the process which is understandable. The game creators have to have the games approved first with legal opinions etc. LL will have a list of games that went through the approval process which the game operators are to choose from. The operators have to choose through a list of games that went through the approval process but there are no games listed for this as of yet. Creators Should you wish to create a Skill Game for use in Second Life, you represent and agree that you: (i) have received, and paid for, a Creator License from Linden Lab through the Skill Gaming application process; (ii) will only offer Skill Games that have been approved by Linden Lab through the Skill Gaming application process; (iii) will abide by, and remain in full compliance with, the Skill Gaming Program Terms and Conditions; and (iv) will maintain accurate, current and complete information about yourself and your Skill Games through your Second Life account and the Skill Gaming application process. Each Creator shall: Ensure that “[slgaming]” will be included as a prefix in the root object name field of each Skill Game; Ensure that the “llTransferLindenDollars” Linden Scripting Language function will be used for all outgoing Linden Dollar transactions for each Skill Game; and Verify that each purchaser of its approved Skill Games has been approved by Linden Lab as an Operator through the Skill Gaming application process. Linden Lab will maintain a list of Operators. If you fail to satisfy any of these requirements, your Skill Games will not be permitted for placement on any Skill Gaming Regions. Since, as you say, he's a Game Operator, not a Creator, I don't really see why you are quoting something describing what Creators must do. I am assuming he is in the position of the person asking this FAQ: I already operate games of skill that offer Linden Dollar payouts. What do I need to do to ensure I am following the Terms of Service? Apply to become an approved operator. Provided that you submit an application before August 1, 2014, you may continue to operate games of skill while your application is being reviewed. In the event that you are notified that your application has not been approved, you must immediately cease operation of games of skill that offer Linden Dollar payouts. That is, they say in terms he doesn't need to wait for anything to be approved. He need only submit his application by August 1 and he can carry on operating the game while LL consider the application. Further on, they explain what he needs to provide: What information will I need to provide in my application to become an approved operator? The three part application process will include providing the following information. For more details, please review the Skill Gaming Policy and the application. Basic account information, such as the information described here. A reasoned legal opinion from a credible attorney in good standing, which describes in detail the operation and legality of the games of skill you are submitting for approval, including the creators of each game of skill; A sworn affidavit or declaration 1) certifies the facts set forth in the application and legal opinion; and 2) attests compliance with Linden Lab’s requirements. The information that you provide as part of the application process will be subject to our Privacy Policy. There's nothing there about having to wait for the game to be approved and appear on any lists. On the contrary, it says to get your application in before August 1 and you can carry on operating while the applications are being considered. Common sense dictates that it would be a good idea first to contact the Creator to ensure that the Creator is applying for approval, and possibly ask for a copy of the description of the game the Creator's attorney is using. Assuming the Creator is trying to get the game approved, then the would-be Operator needs to contact his attorney and describe the game and his role in operating it. Assuming the attorney agrees the game sounds like a game of skill, the Operator swears an affidavit containing a description of the game and the attorney prepares an opinion about whether or not it's a game of skill according to US and local law. That's exactly the same process as someone will need to undertake in a year's time, when there are some approved games to choose from. The Operator doesn't gain anything by waiting for games to appear on the approved list, other than some added reassurance that they are games of skill. What information do you say the would-be Operator needs to provide his attorney that he can't provide today? I just don't understand where you get the idea from that the Operator needs to wait for the game to be approved when the FAQ clearly say that you don't need to wait (at least if the application is submitted before August 1) and do explain what, in fact, Operators need to do. Please direct me to whatever it is that LL has said to give you the idea an existing Operator needs to wait for LL to approve anything before he can submit an application, or ask his attorney for an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: His post was ... "How does our lawyer provide required documentation for games that have not been approved yet" He is a potential game operator not a game creator or in regards to his question he is. Just a quick interjection here... Why would a would-be operator seek an operator's license if no games have yet been licensed? Surely, anyone would wait until something is licensed before trying to get an operator's license, and a lawyer for the would-be operator would only need to be consulted after some game or other has become licensed. Therefore, the game would exist at the time a would-be operator seek's a license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Innula Zenovka wrote: Sorina Garrigus wrote: ??? The would be operator describes an approved game to his attorney that is not yet approved and you don't see the difficulty? Ray Charles can see the difficulty. He can't describe a game he doesn't even have the name of the so called approved game let alone a description. Client: "Hi I want you so send a letter to Linden Labs about a skill game business and the games within it that its ok for me to do so" Attorney: "Sure, what is the name and description of the games in question and I will get right on it." Client: "I don't have the names of the games or descriptions because there is nothing on the approved games list. you clearly don't understand the process which is understandable. The game creators have to have the games approved first with legal opinions etc. LL will have a list of games that went through the approval process which the game operators are to choose from. The operators have to choose through a list of games that went through the approval process but there are no games listed for this as of yet. Creators Should you wish to create a Skill Game for use in Second Life, you represent and agree that you: (i) have received, and paid for, a Creator License from Linden Lab through the Skill Gaming application process; (ii) will only offer Skill Games that have been approved by Linden Lab through the Skill Gaming application process; (iii) will abide by, and remain in full compliance with, the Skill Gaming Program Terms and Conditions; and (iv) will maintain accurate, current and complete information about yourself and your Skill Games through your Second Life account and the Skill Gaming application process. Each Creator shall: Ensure that “[slgaming]” will be included as a prefix in the root object name field of each Skill Game; Ensure that the “llTransferLindenDollars” Linden Scripting Language function will be used for all outgoing Linden Dollar transactions for each Skill Game; and Verify that each purchaser of its approved Skill Games has been approved by Linden Lab as an Operator through the Skill Gaming application process. Linden Lab will maintain a list of Operators. If you fail to satisfy any of these requirements, your Skill Games will not be permitted for placement on any Skill Gaming Regions. Since, as you say, he's a Game Operator, not a Creator, I don't really see why you are quoting something describing what Creators must do. I am assuming he is in the position of the person asking this FAQ: I already operate games of skill that offer Linden Dollar payouts. What do I need to do to ensure I am following the Terms of Service? Apply to become an approved operator. Provided that you submit an application before August 1, 2014, you may continue to operate games of skill while your application is being reviewed. In the event that you are notified that your application has not been approved, you must immediately cease operation of games of skill that offer Linden Dollar payouts. That is, they say in terms he doesn't need to wait for anything to be approved. He need only submit his application by August 1 and he can carry on operating the game while LL consider the application. Further on, they explain what he needs to provide: What information will I need to provide in my application to become an approved operator? The three part application process will include providing the following information. For more details, please review the Skill Gaming Policy and the application. Basic account information, such as the information described here. A reasoned legal opinion from a credible attorney in good standing, which describes in detail the operation and legality of the games of skill you are submitting for approval, including the creators of each game of skill; A sworn affidavit or declaration 1) certifies the facts set forth in the application and legal opinion; and 2) attests compliance with Linden Lab’s requirements. The information that you provide as part of the application process will be subject to our Privacy Policy. There's nothing there about having to wait for the game to be approved and appear on any lists. On the contrary, it says to get your application in before August 1 and you can carry on operating while the applications are being considered. Common sense dictates that it would be a good idea first to contact the Creator to ensure that the Creator is applying for approval, and possibly ask for a copy of the description of the game the Creator's attorney is using. Assuming the Creator is trying to get the game approved, then the would-be Operator needs to contact his attorney and describe the game and his role in operating it. Assuming the attorney agrees the game sounds like a game of skill, the Operator swears an affidavit containing a description of the game and the attorney prepares an opinion about whether or not it's a game of skill according to US and local law. That's exactly the same process as someone will need to undertake in a year's time, when there are some approved games to choose from. The Operator doesn't gain anything by waiting for games to appear on the approved list, other than some added reassurance that they are games of skill. What information do you say the would-be Operator needs to provide his attorney that he can't provide today? I just don't understand where you get the idea from that the Operator needs to wait for the game to be approved when the FAQ clearly say that you don't need to wait (at least if the application is submitted before August 1) and do explain what, in fact, Operators need to do. Please direct me to whatever it is that LL has said to give you the idea an existing Operator needs to wait for LL to approve anything before he can submit an application, or ask his attorney for an opinion. There is something that I consider to be wrong about it. Under the question, "What information will I need to provide in my application to become an approved operator?", part of the answer is, "A reasoned legal opinion from a credible attorney in good standing, which describes in detail the operation and legality of the games of skill you are submitting for approval, including the creators of each game of skill;" So someone applying for an operator's license has to provide information about the games s/he is asking to be approved for. I suppose a person could provide the information about games that haven't been licensed, assuming they will be licensed soon. But there are 2 question with it:- 1) Will LL license someone as an operator when the games the info is provided for are not yet approved? (the current situation) 2) What does the operator do when a new game comes out and gets approval? Pay another fee, plus pay a lawyer, to operate that one as well? If so, it will result in operators paying fees and lawyers time after time when each game is approved. The operator side of things seems very shambolic to me. For one thing, an operator should not have anything to do with the games when s/he applies for approval. The games are taken care of by the creator. All the operator should need to do is show that s/he is a person of goog character etc. In other words, imo, the operator license part is a shambles. An operator should not need to be approved as a operator of specific games. S/he should only need to be approved as someone acceptable to operate all licensed games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: There is something that I consider to be wrong about it. Under the question, "What information will I need to provide in my application to become an approved operator?", part of the answer is, "A reasoned legal opinion from a credible attorney in good standing, which describes in detail the operation and legality of the games of skill you are submitting for approval, including the creators of each game of skill;" So someone applying for an operator's license has to provide information about the games s/he is asking to be approved for. I suppose a person could provide the information about games that haven't been licensed, assuming they will be licensed soon. But there are 2 question with it:- 1) Will LL license someone as an operator when the games the info is provided for are not yet approved? (the current situation) 2) What does the operator do when a new game comes out and gets approval? Pay another fee, plus pay a lawyer, to operate that one as well? If so, it will result in operators paying fees and lawyers time after time when each game is approved. The operator side of things seems very shambolic to me. For one thing, an operator should not have anything to do with the games when s/he applies for approval. The games are taken care of by the creator. All the operator should need to do is show that s/he is a person of goog character etc. In other words, imo, the operator license part is a shambles. An operator should not need to be approved as a operator of specific games. S/he should only need to be approved as someone acceptable to operate all licensed games. The answer to question 1, I would have thought, is clearly contained in the answer to the FAQ "I already operate games of skill that offer Linden Dollar payouts. What do I need to do to ensure I am following the Terms of Service?" That is, submit your application before August 1, and carry on as normal until you hear from us. The answer to question 2, as far as I can see from page 7 of the application form, is that yes, you do need to submit a separate application each time you want to add a new game (though you can apply for approval for several games at once). As far as I understand LL's reply to the FAQ, Why do both proposed creators and operators need to provide reasoned legal opinions?, it's because they want to be sure that it's lawful for the operator to operate this particular game in his or her home jurisdiction. That seems not unreasonable; we know that different states have different laws about what games residents of the state may play, so I can understand that it might well be legal to operate a particular game if you live in Texas, but not if you live in Utah, or vice versa. However, what I don't really understand is what the attorney is supposed to say if the would-be operator lives outside the USA. If I can find a qualified US attorney here in the UK to act for me, all he'd be able to say, I suppose, is that it's not against US law for US residents to access this kind of game when it's run by a British citizen living in Britain, and neither is it against US for British citizens to operate such games when US residents may play them. I'm rather surprised they don't also want confirmation it's lawful for me, as a Brit, to operate this kind of game in the first place, but apparently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Hird Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Presumably, if the operation/game is good to go according to US legislation (and LL TOS), if you have beef with your local authorities or not is not really their business because there is nothing they can do about it. You only inciminate yourself in your country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innula Zenovka Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Gavin Hird wrote: Presumably, if the operation/game is good to go according to US legislation (and LL TOS), if you have beef with your local authorities or not is not really their business because there is nothing they can do about it. You only inciminate yourself in your country. I was thinking more of possible problems with PayPal it might cause LL if they're facilitating my unlawfully running a game from the UK, but since I'm not immediately planning to operate any games (though I may make some) I'm not going to worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now