Jump to content

Skill Gaming Policy Thread


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1612 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Yeah I was really shocked to see my state on the LL list since online gaming is legal. The only reason I can see that they put us on the list is our minimum age is 21 and LL's policy is 19. I can see that LL might consider someone under 21 from my state accessing these games as too great a risk and blacklisted all the residents from my state to be safe.

Not justifying the position (I think it is stupid) but it is a possible explaination of the thinking.

 

EDIT: Let me clarify. I think it is stupid because LL could just as easily set the minimum age for Games of skill In SL at 21 and avoided the whole mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


Surfaqua Oh wrote:

I'am i too very confused and i have a other question

 

 

Several people in
a
group
ask me:
the
roleplay
games
he
considers
skill
game
?

 

 

SLAddict Allen wrote:


Linden Lab wrote:

Hi Surfaqua,

As each game differs in its operational functions, we are unable to provide opinions of whether a specific game would be subject to our Skill Gaming Policy via this forum. Each creator and operator of games will need to evaluate whether their game(s) would be subject to, and in compliance with, this policy.

 

I'm confused by this answer.

 

You've created a set of rules, yet you are unable to determine what violates them?

So if a creator "decides" that what he is doing is in compliance, you are saying Linden Lab will not come saying that he isn't?

No wonder the grid is still littered with gaming.

 

 

 

The way I read this is that LL is applying two elements to determine if something is a game under these rules.  If both these elements are present then you need to go through the certification process:  You have to pay to play and there is a pay out.

If a game has both these elements and it doesn't "self certify" by supplying an opinion from a Lawyer, then it will be removed from the grid.

If a game provider supplies an opinion from an attorney that it is "legal," then LL will allow the game to be used.

Basically speaking, LL does not plan on judging the games themselves.  As long as the opinion looks 'kosher' they will allow the game.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:


Sassy Romano wrote:

Linden Lab, now that you're back can you PLEASE answer the question as to why you need both the creator AND operator to provide the same legal opinion.  We get that it's a CYA exercise but the big question is, will YOU accept the creators legal council stated opinion from the OPERATOR given that the operator has no way whatsoever of knowing the innerds of the game.

In other words, creator makes available their affidavit available to others to use as their sworn statement, will that work for you or do you insist that both parties incur expense when one can't even verify the claim?

I've just had a thought.  Maybe it's that LL need confirmation it's lawful for the Operator to run this game in his or her jurisdiction.    That is, the sort of games someone in the UK  can operate online without needing a licence from the UK authorities might not be the same as what someone in Mexico can operate online without needing a licence from the Mexican authorities, and LL is concerned to check that I'm not breaking the law by operating this particular game from where I live.

That would make sense to me, but it's just unclear at the moment what exactly is needed.    What we need, I think, is confirmation from LL whether they need  an opinion from my solicitor that it's lawful for me to operate this game from the UK without needing a licence or simply a general opinion that this game, as described, is a game of skill and not of chance?

yes. Is pretty much spot this

In this case the Mexican Operator would have to provide a reasoned argument for why a British made game can be operated by them in SL in compliance with Mexico laws

a Operator in a USA state would have to do the same, even with a game made in the USA as the Creators legal opinion maybe be based on the creators State law, which may be different from the intending buyer/operator

+

about how can I self-certify that a game made by another is legal in my own jurisdiction, if I cant see the source code

as others already asking. I think if the game maker can provide a written description of how their game works and how it complies with their own state/country laws to the intending customers then is satisfactory/enough info on which to form/secure a considered opinion for ourselves

if the game maker is unwilling to provide this info then nobody is going to buy their games

if the game does not do what the info says it does after purchase then is in breach of the Policy and is ban material

some game makers are going to balk at providing detailed written info on their games, but if they dont then the market will decide these decisions ultimately

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is the only reason I see... Not fair for adults that like to play in SL... They should fix the age to 21 so is more fair to all. Hubby and I have a premium accounts and we will be not to renewing If our state stays on the list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


NoemiLuv wrote:

I've been doing some research and some of the states on the list you provide as prohibited are actually gambling states.

Prohibited States & Countries

Residents of the following states and countries may not participate in Skill Gaming in Second Life:
  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • Delaware
  • Florida
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Maryland
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota
  • Tennessee

Here is a link to USA legal online gaming states: 

I hope this help because seems a little confusing that gamers on legal states can't play.

Having glanced at some of the fine print for my state I'll just say you need to read the fine print for each of them.

In my state only very specific things are legal and I don't think gaming in SL would qualify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My state doesn't qualify probably because of the age limit as Darkness and I were discusing. I don't really need to read about all the other states as I only live on one. I'm glad you found the small prints for your state Perrie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Linden Lab wrote:

If you’ve read the
,
s and
documentation on our revised
and have comments and/or questions, you can post them here. We’ll be keeping an eye on this forum thread regarding Skill Gaming.

 

Well this is lovely! Everyone is so concerned about what games they can and cannot play or have but has anyone looked at the states that prohibit playing games of skill? If you are in one of these states, you CANNOT play the games and I am assuming that you cannot even own them. Take a look at the states, IF you live in any of these states you cannot partake in the games. I would like to ask the community manager if this includes owning the games. Thank you.

  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • Delaware
  • Florida
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Maryland
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota
  • Tennessee

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can an attorney possibly form an opinion to the legality of any game without:

1. being a scripter who understands lsl and gaming coding and

2. seeing the source code for thelselves

 

It cant be done.

 

Creatoirs may be able to do this as they have the source.
Operators cannot.

 

This is the end of it, its a ban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The main reason the new policy effectively bans skillgaming in sl for 95+% of gameroom owners is the application process and its requirements. If it were -just- the $100 application fee, that could be absorbed. If it were -just- the raise in tier costs for gaming sims, it could be absorbed.. but what absolutely cannot be absorbed is the attorney fees and retainers assiociated with obtaining written legal opinions on each game a game room has. There is dozens of variety of games in SL, and not only do the creators have to pay an attorney for this service, but the policy states the operator must as well. This is -Impossible- for any operator to provide, unless they are also the game's creator.
Attorneys deal in facts, and any legitimate attorney will not give an opinion unless its based in known fact. As a gameroom operator, I rely COMPLETLY on the creator to affirm that the game complies with SL TOS. It is Impossible for me to know FOR A FACT that it does or not, because I do not have access to the source code. This is a common sense problem and its a huge flaw in the gaming policy. Operators SHOULD not have to pay huge attorney fees to get legal letters written thus making startup cost prohibitive. Operators CAN not be expected to supply legal opinions from attorneys about virtual inworld goods that they do not have access to the source code, and thus cannot verify the wether a game has 'a material part' of chance/skill. They simply dont have enough evidence to make that kind of determination."

I completely agree with Octavia !

 

This new TOS must be a draft. Linden Lab should start reviewing their new TOS and reading the last comments. It is not with the same copy/paste of the community manager that the situation will change.

Therefore I advise that NO OPERATORS request a licence until we get an official answer from LINDEN on this forum about the questions raised and the review of the TOS !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if I understand this right my friend (in the UK ) runs a games place but offers lots of free to play games to help new avs get a start in sl. he will now have to fork out $100 to carry on helping newbies? He doesn't run for a profit so this would come out of his own pocket, as would any legal fees (and i think a solicitor here would probably laugh at this), so what incentive exactly is ther for him to carry on? a big fat 0. There are lots of ways to make sure various state laws do not inconvenience every one else. With the announcement last week this should do a good job of finishing off the grid even more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the attorney is asked to give an opinion about the code, any more than, in RL, your attorney would need to know anything about the code of your online game (or Android app) to be able to tell you if it's a game of skill or game of chance according to local law and your description of the game.   All the attorney needs is an explanation of the game, its rules and how it pays out. 

If it doesn't do what you say it does in the affidavit you've sworn, then LL can take a look at the code and see what's going on.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:

Since you cannot  access any gaming sims if you live in one of those states, it's difficult to see how you could rez  the machines, let alone manage the establishment.   (See
item 6.1)

BUT on the other hand, online gaming IS allowed in at least the state I live in, and isn't that what the new gaming regions are? online?

EDITED: to fix a typo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that I know anything about your state's legislation or about LL's decision-making process, but what does the legislation say about operating, as opposed to playing, online games?   Would you need any sort of licence from the State's regulatory bodies to operate the games or would LL need a licence  to host them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Linden Lab wrote:

Hi Cam,

Games of chance are and have been prohibited in accordance with our Wagering Policy. If you encounter such items, you may submit an AR to our support team for investigation.

As for contests, 
Second Life residents will need to make this determination on a case by case basis to the extent that they believe that their "sploders", contest boards, and other objects are deemed a game of skill (instead of chance which is still prohibited under our 
), and will need to comply with our updated 
.

In the event that we become aware of any violations of our policies, we retain the discretion to take action pursuant to such policies.

best regards,

Do you even know what a sploder is? You pay $L into it and have a chance to win a percentage of the total amount paid into it... That is the very definition of a game of chance.

Here is a question, will we be able to flag items on the MP that violate the gaming policy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skill Game....this is such a strange area for your above average SL resident, let alone the average one.

 

What is an example of a skill game here, please LL?

 

A lot of mention is being made of some very common things that actually appear to be wagering rather than skill games.

Sploders: Pay in, timer is up, money is redistributed to all players in differing portions according to an algorithm. Apparently random, any programmer knows there is no such thing as true chance/randomness in programmed systems. But the players have no input, there is no skill, no action they can take. Not truly random, but no skill required. Its a wealth redistributor is all. Not even a game as there is no activity but pay to join, wait for payout.essentially its a Lottery, which makes it against the TOS already.


Zyngo: I admit i have no familiarity with this game at all. I am told its like Bingo with some little extra junk thrown in. Bingo is a game of chance, not skill. The player cannot affect the outcome, he merely sits there and dots each number as it comes up and if he is lucky he gets the Bingo first. That's pure chance that the numbers that come up correspond to the numbers on his bingo sheet. Not a skill game, this is wagering and against the TOS.

Greedy Greedy: Call it waht you will, Greedy has some skill, but is still heavily reliant upon chance. In fact the skill in Gredy is pushing chance as far as you can without taking too many failures. Game of chance, not game of skill.


So if these are all games of chance, what exactly is being regulated here? RL examples of games of skill are Darts, Billiards, Bowling, Horseshoes, Pool, Snooker, Chess, Checkers, Magic the Gathering, Trivial Pursuit/Pub Games, and many other things that may have some element of chance involved but mostly rely upon the skill, mental, physical or both, of the players involved.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but if this is the case there is very very little that will actually be affected by any of this new Games of Skill policy and either everyone is spazzing out about the wrong thing, or LL hideously missed the mark in trying to wrangle money from Gaming in SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier in this thread I made some statements about these devices for sale on the Market Place.

Having taken the time do more reading it has occured to me that they can not be sold there, not even the so-called 'legal sploders.'  I have struck all my previous statements.

The Wiki states:

4.2.iii 

"Each Creator shall:

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."

There is no practical way I can see that they can be left up for sale on the Market Place and a creator control who buys them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:


Linden Lab wrote:

Hi Cam,

Games of chance are and have been prohibited in accordance with our Wagering Policy. If you encounter such items, you may submit an AR to our support team for investigation.

As for contests, 
Second Life residents will need to make this determination on a case by case basis to the extent that they believe that their "sploders", contest boards, and other objects are deemed a game of skill (instead of chance which is still prohibited under our 
), and will need to comply with our updated 
.

In the event that we become aware of any violations of our policies, we retain the discretion to take action pursuant to such policies.

best regards,

Do you even know what a sploder is? You pay $L into it and have a chance to win a percentage of the total amount paid into it... That is the very definition of a game of chance.

Here is a question, will we be able to flag items on the MP that violate the gaming policy?

Since when have we needed permission to flag anything?  ;)

But as I have now posted, it seems pretty clear that none off these devices, even if they are aceptable to be used, can be sold on the MP.

Though a definitive statement by LL would not hurt.

4.2.iii 

Each Creator shall:

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.

There is no practical way I can see that they can be left up for sale on the Market Place and a creator control who buys them.

Am I correct Mr. Linden Lab?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


NoemiLuv wrote:

I've been doing some research and some of the states on the list you provide as prohibited are actually gambling states.

Prohibited States & Countries

Residents of the following states and countries may not participate in Skill Gaming in Second Life:
  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • Delaware
  • Florida
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Maryland
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota
  • Tennessee

Here is a link to USA legal online gaming states: 

I hope this help because seems a little confusing that gamers on legal states can't play.

Per the ToS..

10.2 The applicable law and venue is in San Francisco, California.

You agree that this Agreement and the relationship between you and Linden Lab shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to conflict of law principles or the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods. Further, you and Linden Lab agree to submit to the exclusive personal jurisdiction and venue of the courts located in the City and County of San Francisco, California, except as provided in Section 10 regarding arbitration.

 

They don't give a rats butt about other state laws.

ETA.. you really need to re-read that link you posted.. none of the states have an issue with online gambling.

ETA again.. it's late and i need more coffee... I really need to read your post better.. Terribly sorry.. LL are a bunch of goobers on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Linden Lab wrote:

If you’ve read the
,
s and
documentation on our revised
and have comments and/or questions, you can post them here. We’ll be keeping an eye on this forum thread regarding Skill Gaming.

 

It states....

Gaming Residents

Should you wish to participate in Skill Gaming in Second Life, you represent and agree that you: (i) are at least nineteen (19) years of age;

Isn't the legal age to gamble 18 in the US? Where did you guys come up with 19?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:


Linden Lab wrote:

Hi Cam,

Games of chance are and have been prohibited in accordance with our Wagering Policy. If you encounter such items, you may submit an AR to our support team for investigation.

As for contests, 
Second Life residents will need to make this determination on a case by case basis to the extent that they believe that their "sploders", contest boards, and other objects are deemed a game of skill (instead of chance which is still prohibited under our 
), and will need to comply with our updated 
.

In the event that we become aware of any violations of our policies, we retain the discretion to take action pursuant to such policies.

best regards,

Do you even know what a sploder is? You pay $L into it and have a chance to win a percentage of the total amount paid into it... That is the very definition of a game of chance.

Here is a question, will we be able to flag items on the MP that violate the gaming policy?

Since when have we needed permission to flag anything? 
;)

But as I have now posted, it seems pretty clear that none off these devices, even if they are aceptable to be used, can be sold on the MP.

Though a definitive statement by LL would not hurt.

4.2.iii 

Each Creator shall:

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
.

There is no practical way I can see that they can be left up for sale on the Market Place and a creator control who buys them.

Am I correct Mr. Linden Lab?

i'm mean an actual "why are you flagging this?" "Violation of gambling policy" drop down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.


Innula Zenovka wrote:

I don't think the attorney is asked to give an opinion about the code, any more than, in RL, your attorney would need to know anything about the code of your online game (or Android app) to be able to tell you if it's a game of skill or game of chance according to local law and your description of the game.   All the attorney needs is an explanation of the game, its rules and how it pays out. 

If it doesn't do what you say it does in the affidavit you've sworn, then LL can take a look at the code and see what's going on.     

 

 

Hi Innula.

 

This is a virual environment.. The code -is- the game.

 

If that was the case, why involve the attorney at all? Why not just a sworn affidavit from me that to the best of my knowledge, the game works as the creator described?

 

Personal liability. Lindens are trying to make operators personally liable and culpable in San Francisco court.

 

Well I am not willing to take on that personal liability, I did not create the game, I dont know how it works, or if it works as described. As a game owner I rely 100% on the creator to make that affirmation. No credible attorney should base a legal opinion upon the unproven statements of others. Wether its a facebook app, or an android app. Or a SL game. Attorneys have to base thier opinions on law and facts

I can affirm by affidavit that I have not altered the game, in any way. Beyond that, its between lindens and the game crator as far as I'm concerned.  So I won't be applying, and potentially making myself personally liable for the work and affermations made by others. That would be incredibly stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1612 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...