FreeBitco.in is no longer a KYC free casino! (New terms)

[Poker Player]

This is new to me, and by the looks of it is recent. We will have to see if freebitco.in continues to operate as before despite this new wording, and as TheQuin defends or we start to have complaints in the forum. Also if this is the beginning of a series of changes.

The fact is that there are still casinos that do not ask for KYC under any circumstances and freebitco.in is no longer one of them.

[1714671659]

1714671659

[1714671659]

1714671659

[1714671659]

1714671659

[1714671659]

1714671659

[1714671659]

1714671659

[Darker45]

This is new to me, and by the looks of it is recent. We will have to see if freebitco.in continues to operate as before despite this new wording, and as TheQuin defends or we start to have complaints in the forum. Also if this is the beginning of a series of changes.

The fact is that there are still casinos that do not ask for KYC under any circumstances and freebitco.in is no longer one of them.

In fairness to TheQuin, indeed "under any circumstances" might simply be an exaggeration. They're hollow words. If worst comes to worst, they might not hold water.

Anyway, to TheQuin, since you're not pushed by any agency to include KYC in your ToS or required by Costa Rica to implement it, why did you include it anyway? Is it not possible to draft a new and more professional ToS without including KYC?

I think this is a result of a common misunderstanding here on the forum of what a KYC site is. A KYC site requires you to verify your identity either at signup or when you want to deposit, gamble or trade.

All sites are subject to the laws of wherever they are based. They would have to comply with any court order requiring them to identify a customer (eg. suspected money laundering, handling stolen funds etc.). That's the case for all sites without any mention of it in their ToS. Is it professional to omit it?

In summary, using the definition that we are now a KYC site means that a non-KYC site is willing to violate the laws they are subject to.

Thanks for pointing this out. This is correct. And this is normally missed by many of us.

However-- I'm not a legal expert, by the way-- the difference is that those gambling sites that clearly specified in their ToS that they reserve the right to demand KYC from users whenever they deem necessary can handily demand for it. On the other hand, those that claim to be non-KYC gambling sites can't do it just like that. Until and unless there's a court order or perhaps an official order coming from a relevant agency requiring a particular user to provide his/her personal details, the site can't just lock an account or freeze funds on a whim.

[Mahdirakib]

OP, Maybe the title is a bit excessive. They introduced some restrictions for certain countries and announced a possible request for KYC information in case they suspect an attempt to circumvent this rule. So for a large number of users, it is still a no-KYC casino.

No, Freebitco is no longer a no-KYC casino. They have registered a gambling license, and the KYC verification requirement is the part of the license regulation. Based on the reply of TheQuin, the chance is almost zero to ask the user to complete the identity verification. But you can't deny the possibility while it has been added in the terms.

The BV is actually in Costa Rica rather than Curacao so there's no licencing issue. We actually moved the company there a while ago and wetsuit had discussed with me the possibility of adding new ToS at the time.

Quoting this again. AFAIK, Both BV and NV is under Curacao. Can you ask 'wetsuit' to know about the registered address of FBC BV company? I'm still confused whether FBC BV is under Curacao or Costa Rica. The company address will clear the doubts.

[Haunebu]

It's sad that bad businesses unfairly not paying out makes you guys think that anyone honestly stating their obligations in their Terms will do the same.

Fact is that more and more crypto gambling sites including popular sites like Stake are taking advantage of KYC in an unfair manner which is why it's tough to trust any KYC site easily these days.

Another thing that scares gamblers is their identities getting leaked due to hacker attacks in recent years.

[Saint-loup]

The fact is that there are still casinos that do not ask for KYC under any circumstances and freebitco.in is no longer one of them.

There are still casinos not asking KYC under any circumstances? Really? Which ones are they please? Except few fully decentralized casinos/sportsbooks, I am not aware of that. It must be some tiny ones I guess, no? It's sad to notice that, but all centralized exchanges and casinos are taking the KYC mandatory road one after another one, so the ones remaining are the exceptions now.

[ryzaadit]

KYC or not, if the casini type is register account to the website.

Always expect there will be some "KYC" no matter what it is in the future, if you playing on-chain gambling while all the transactions, bet, etc based on chain-transaction but you got "KYC". That's really f*ck up.

I don't see wrong on these movement, because based of my experience "centralized casino" can request any KYC even they are not really ask you at the time you are playing or the first time site is launch.

[dwyane36]

It's sad that bad businesses unfairly not paying out makes you guys think that anyone honestly stating their obligations in their Terms will do the same.

There is no doubt that most of the users on this forum will still trust freebitcoin as before since the honesty of the site has been proven over time. But despite this, some users will have skepticism and distrust because of the new ToS, and I think this is a normal reaction just because of the cases when other gambling sites have abused verification.

[danadc]

It's sad that bad businesses unfairly not paying out makes you guys think that anyone honestly stating their obligations in their Terms will do the same.

There is no doubt that most of the users on this forum will still trust freebitcoin as before since the honesty of the site has been proven over time. But despite this, some users will have skepticism and distrust because of the new ToS, and I think this is a normal reaction just because of the cases when other gambling sites have abused verification.

I am always going to trust freebitcoin, because it is the casino that seems to me that despite the fact that many things are changing now , it provides security and that is what matters to me , there are casinos that change and change everything, even their security methods and that is the only way they manage to get people to leave , if they ask me for kyc in freebitcoin it is one of those few Casinos that I will give it to, I do not like to give it, because I am a person who likes privacy and it is n this casino it reminds me of many beautiful things that I went through, for that reason I still think that the KYC process in Freebitcoin is something that I Could always do without so much Trouble.

[Onyeeze]

What ring into my man concerning the new rules and regulations of this gambling platform of frrebitco is that they are afraid of accusations and allegation by the government that should be the reason they are changing their rule and regulations of the platform, for me it's good to read and cross check some certain things moving on this in some gambling platforms before further registration in their platform because without that you may lose your funds as results of disobeying their rules and regulations

[DaNNy001]

It's sad that bad businesses unfairly not paying out makes you guys think that anyone honestly stating their obligations in their Terms will do the same.

Fact is that more and more crypto gambling sites including popular sites like Stake are taking advantage of KYC in an unfair manner which is it's tough to trust any KYC site easily these days.

Another thing that scares gamblers is their identities getting leaked due to hacker attacks in recent years.

And this particular feature of a non kyc casino has been the one of the major reason the few one that are holding this policy are thriving but  its seem all those casino are now up to something else and I think this has been the reason for so many complaints by customers against these casino because imaging a casino that was once kyc free and all of a sudden their rules change and now require kyc from same customers that is using your website for that sole purpose of it being KYC free.

[Lanatsa]

It's sad that bad businesses unfairly not paying out makes you guys think that anyone honestly stating their obligations in their Terms will do the same.

There is no doubt that most of the users on this forum will still trust freebitcoin as before since the honesty of the site has been proven over time. But despite this, some users will have skepticism and distrust because of the new ToS, and I think this is a normal reaction just because of the cases when other gambling sites have abused verification.

I am always going to trust freebitcoin, because it is the casino that seems to me that despite the fact that many things are changing now , it provides security and that is what matters to me , there are casinos that change and change everything, even their security methods and that is the only way they manage to get people to leave , if they ask me for kyc in freebitcoin it is one of those few Casinos that I will give it to, I do not like to give it, because I am a person who likes privacy and it is n this casino it reminds me of many beautiful things that I went through, for that reason I still think that the KYC process in Freebitcoin is something that I Could always do without so much Trouble.

Everything is subjected to change and this is what we should be having on mind is that expect the unexpected as always and this doesnt only limit out on crypto market happenings but also in real life situations on which changes is really that inevitable because we are really that progressing and also in some factors specially with government who do really love on monitoring and control or leashing up everything according into
their likes on which it would really be just that common. Now that Freebitco did go into the path on having that regulation or terms then for us users who had been using up their site should not worry,
this had just been stated that they do have the rights on asking some KYC if its needed and not that compulsory for those people who do tend to play or even into its old players.

Also, we do have tons of options or choices in the market considering about the numbers then if you dont find out on staying up on Freebitco anymore, then you are really that free to leave and find another one.

[DoublerHunter]

KYC or not, if the casini type is register account to the website.

Always expect there will be some "KYC" no matter what it is in the future, if you playing on-chain gambling while all the transactions, bet, etc based on chain-transaction but you got "KYC". That's really f*ck up.

I don't see wrong on these movement, because based of my experience "centralized casino" can request any KYC even they are not really ask you at the time you are playing or the first time site is launch.

^Definitely right but good to see in Freebitco.in.
In my own opinion, KYC regulations are often implemented to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks, prevent fraudulent activities, and promote a safer gambling environment. This serves as a means to authenticate the identity of users and protect against potential money laundering, underage gambling, or other illicit activities. It is true that even centralized casinos may request KYC information, either during the initial registration process or at a later stage. This is because regulations and compliance requirements vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and operators are obliged to adhere to the laws governing their operations.
Because it can be frustrating to encounter KYC procedures, especially when participating in decentralized or blockchain-based gambling, they are typically in place to maintain legality, security, and fairness for all users.

[BenCodie]

Another one bites the dust choosing or forced to start using KYC as a way to claw back balances within their casino.

Freebitco.in was a faucet before a casino, why it ever had to be so greedy and add that function is beyond me. Now they not only face repercussions for being a casino, but will do wrong by many of their users in the process via KYC.

Hopefully this age old crypto name does not create complaints by its users like other casinos in this board, who abuse the KYC system evert day.

[TheQuin]

OP, Maybe the title is a bit excessive. They introduced some restrictions for certain countries and announced a possible request for KYC information in case they suspect an attempt to circumvent this rule. So for a large number of users, it is still a no-KYC casino.

No, Freebitco is no longer a no-KYC casino. They have registered a gambling license, and the KYC verification requirement is the part of the license regulation. Based on the reply of TheQuin, the chance is almost zero to ask the user to complete the identity verification. But you can't deny the possibility while it has been added in the terms.

The BV is actually in Costa Rica rather than Curacao so there's no licencing issue. We actually moved the company there a while ago and wetsuit had discussed with me the possibility of adding new ToS at the time.

Quoting this again. AFAIK, Both BV and NV is under Curacao. Can you ask 'wetsuit' to know about the registered address of FBC BV company? I'm still confused whether FBC BV is under Curacao or Costa Rica. The company address will clear the doubts.

The company is:

Name: FB Coins Limited
Registration number: 3-102-854043
Date of Registration: 13 June 2022
Address: Land and Business Attorneys, Building Plaza Murano, Eighth Floor, Office number 82, San Jose, Costa Roca

I don't know if the Curacao company is related to us but if it is then it's one of the other businesses wetsuit owns and nothing to do with the freebitco.in

To be pedantic here your statements are incorrect.

1 "Freebitco is no longer a no-KYC casino".

 By the definition you are using we never were. By the real definition of being required to provide ID to use the service we are not.

2 "and the KYC verification requirement is the part of the license regulation"

There is no gaming license so there are no regulatory requirements. What I have been describing are simply our obligations not to do anything illegal.
 

This is new to me, and by the looks of it is recent. We will have to see if freebitco.in continues to operate as before despite this new wording, and as TheQuin defends or we start to have complaints in the forum. Also if this is the beginning of a series of changes.

The fact is that there are still casinos that do not ask for KYC under any circumstances and freebitco.in is no longer one of them.

In fairness to TheQuin, indeed "under any circumstances" might simply be an exaggeration. They're hollow words. If worst comes to worst, they might not hold water.

Anyway, to TheQuin, since you're not pushed by any agency to include KYC in your ToS or required by Costa Rica to implement it, why did you include it anyway? Is it not possible to draft a new and more professional ToS without including KYC?

I think this is a result of a common misunderstanding here on the forum of what a KYC site is. A KYC site requires you to verify your identity either at signup or when you want to deposit, gamble or trade.

All sites are subject to the laws of wherever they are based. They would have to comply with any court order requiring them to identify a customer (eg. suspected money laundering, handling stolen funds etc.). That's the case for all sites without any mention of it in their ToS. Is it professional to omit it?

In summary, using the definition that we are now a KYC site means that a non-KYC site is willing to violate the laws they are subject to.

Thanks for pointing this out. This is correct. And this is normally missed by many of us.

However-- I'm not a legal expert, by the way-- the difference is that those gambling sites that clearly specified in their ToS that they reserve the right to demand KYC from users whenever they deem necessary can handily demand for it. On the other hand, those that claim to be non-KYC gambling sites can't do it just like that. Until and unless there's a court order or perhaps an official order coming from a relevant agency requiring a particular user to provide his/her personal details, the site can't just lock an account or freeze funds on a whim.

I'm not going to comment on what other sites have written in their ToS but our ToS states:

5.6. You authorize us to use any means we deem necessary to verify your identity and solvency with any third-party information provider.

I don't read that as we can demand ID information from you.

But that wasn't really the point I'm making. I think you're all reading too much importance on what is or isn't written in the ToS. What any site can do (or can be forced to do) is defined by the laws they operate under completely regardless of what the ToS says. A site can't just write a line in their ToS that justifies them to "just lock an account or freeze funds on a whim" if that is effectively theft and illegal. It would be struck down as an unfair contract.

If you think anything about freebitco.in changed when we updated the ToS you are wrong.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

There is no gaming license so there are no regulatory requirements. What I have been describing are simply our obligations not to do anything illegal.

I find this both curious and interesting. As I understand it, you are registered as a company but not with a gaming licence. Then, it is not very clear why there is a list of European countries from which you are not supposed to use the site and not others, because there are other European countries that are not on the list where to offer gaming services like the ones you offer, to comply with the law you would have to acquire a licence from the country, which usually cost a lot of money. And it is a licence that neither you nor any other casino that advertises on this forum has.

[TheQuin]

There is no gaming license so there are no regulatory requirements. What I have been describing are simply our obligations not to do anything illegal.

I find this both curious and interesting. As I understand it, you are registered as a company but not with a gaming licence. Then, it is not very clear why there is a list of European countries from which you are not supposed to use the site and not others, because there are other European countries that are not on the list where to offer gaming services like the ones you offer, to comply with the law you would have to acquire a licence from the country, which usually cost a lot of money. And it is a licence that neither you nor any other casino that advertises on this forum has.

The word "offer" is the key here. Being accessible isn't enough legally to determine that you offered a service in a country^*. I don't know the full details of why each of those countries on the list is included but it's probably a more general issue between CR and those countries than specifically gaming.


* A good example of that can be found in the text of EU GDPR

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679&from=EN#d1e1455-1-1

See 23

Whereas the mere accessibility of the controller's, processor's or an intermediary's website in the Union, of an email address or of other contact details, or the use of a language generally used in the third country where the controller is established, is insufficient to ascertain such intention, factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in one or more Member States with the possibility of ordering goods and services in that other language, or the mentioning of customers or users who are in the Union, may make it apparent that the controller envisages offering goods or services to data subjects in the Union.

[TheQuin]

The company is:
- @TheQuin, the site is outdated?

No. It's a combination of abbreviation and language translation.

[Haunebu]

I think you're all reading too much importance on what is or isn't written in the ToS. What any site can do (or can be forced to do) is defined by the laws they operate under completely regardless of what the ToS says. A site can't just write a line in their ToS that justifies them to "just lock an account or freeze funds on a whim" if that is effectively theft and illegal. It would be struck down as an unfair contract.

If you think anything about freebitco.in changed when we updated the ToS you are wrong.

Which world are you living in? So many sites(Including popular sites) are already using the TOS as their shield cleverly in order to justify themselves and avoid paying out customers even though it's unethical.

Only time will tell whether your site will follow in their footsteps or actually do whatever you boldly stated.

[TheQuin]

Which world are you living in? So many sites(Including popular sites) are already using the TOS as their shield cleverly in order to justify themselves and avoid paying out customers even though it's unethical.

I wish I was living in a world where people actually read my answers before commenting.

But this being the real world I'll just explain it to you again. A site can do whatever it wants within the law. What's written in ToS does not provide any shield. The inclusion or exclusion of anything in the ToS has no bearing on the laws a site operates under. I really don't know how times I need to point this out before it sinks in with some people. A site without any KYC in their ToS could do exactly the same thing.

Unethical /= unlawful^*

Choose which sites you use based on how ethically you think they behave rather than what is written in a ToS.

Only time will tell whether your site will follow in their footsteps or actually do whatever you boldly stated.

Only time will tell how many of you will admit that I was correct.


* Just a little point on this. freebitco.in does have very good lawyers who are experts in this field, but as I've already stated I'm not a lawyer. I have been doing this for a number of years and have had to do quite a bit of research to answer some questions rather than pay the lawyers hourly fee. I don't know CR law but as a Brit I can cite English and Welsh law on gambling.
Bets are defined as being a "gentleman's agreement" and are not legally enforceable.
I agree with you that not paying out fair bets is unethical but however I will point out that it isn't illegal. I would never use a site that has a reputation for not paying out winnings. We certainly have no interest in ruining our reputation. Just because some disreputable sites use a specific clause for bad means doesn't make that clause inherently bad.

If you really think that any site that adds a KYC clause to its ToS is going to become disreputable and use it to avoid paying out I can't wait to see your face when you read the ToS of the site you are promoting in your signature.
PS. I've been a customer there since long before it was added and it didn't change my opinion of them when it was.

[bettercrypto]

As a player, we should know the rules or tos that a platform like this has. Most communities ignore reading these kinds of rules, just entering without reading the terms and conditions.

So the result that often happens is that they complain in the end and they realize that when the terms are shown, they can't do anything and they just wasted the time and time they spent here that they too have a deficiency.