Why they need a license if bitcon is not money?

[3kpk3]

If centralized exchange and banks could need licenses then I do not think anything is wrong with casinos having a license even though they accept Bitcoin deposits, this is very important since to avoid casinos becoming used for mixing money and laundering the same.

There is nothing wrong indeed, but it's pointless if you think about it since these are licenses from some random islands across the world with little credibility due to which they aren't exactly reliable.

Also, you don't need licenses to avoid money laundering and mixing. Proper wagering requirements solves those issues effectively.

[1714280423]

1714280423

[1714280423]

1714280423

[mak013]

No one common gambler will travel to Curacao. Also, we are talking about online crypto casino. No one court will hear about bitcoin and some site with casino.
Here we can find real stories about casino, real problems. I don`t believe reviews but some research of the threads give much more information we need. Just spend two hours and gamble without fear.

Maybe some reviews are not reliable  and that's the reason why other gamblers like you didn't believe easily in reviews. And yes you are right everytime we want to play in a new casino then we must do some research inorder to prevent such loss. Cause through searching we can get more information a reliable informations about the specific casino. And then once we got an a good feedback then we can try betting with them and if their customers services is good and responsible and their withdrawal don't have problems then we can bet higher and deposit a good amount.

The problem with reviews is that it is created mostly with one purpose - to get some money from it. And it doesn`t matter in which way - referral link or casino will pay for review. The casino with good referral payback will get positive review. In such situation the only information we can get - is what games we can see in some casino and website.

[arwin100]

If centralized exchange and banks could need licenses then I do not think anything is wrong with casinos having a license even though they accept Bitcoin deposits, this is very important since to avoid casinos becoming used for mixing money and laundering the same.

There is nothing wrong indeed, but it's pointless if you think about it since these are licenses from some random islands across the world with little credibility due to which they aren't exactly reliable.

Also, you don't need licenses to avoid money laundering and mixing. Proper wagering requirements solves those issues effectively.

Several cases around that license casino still used as tool for money laundering that's why its never became effective for stopping this activities since criminals could find ways to bypass the system and continue what they are doing.

That's why I agree that wager requirements can do the trick since it can make those people doubt to fulfill the requirements since there's huge balance will be taken out for them if they decide to use a casino which have rules like that. Also they might get questioned on the activities they do especially if they are dealing with large amount of money there. That's why I really think license is not really important especially if it comes to random countries since for me it doesn't mean anything. This will just add up some requirements which we don't like to submit.

[Bushdark]

If centralized exchange and banks could need licenses then I do not think anything is wrong with casinos having a license even though they accept Bitcoin deposits, this is very important since to avoid casinos becoming used for mixing money and laundering the same.

There is nothing wrong indeed, but it's pointless if you think about it since these are licenses from some random islands across the world with little credibility due to which they aren't exactly reliable.

Also, you don't need licenses to avoid money laundering and mixing. Proper wagering requirements solves those issues effectively.

License can be required due to regulations and the plan of the government to have power above all firms and companies.
This is not a new thing even the mixers we have are licensed for them to work and if they don't connect with the government for a certain data, they could be ban and there site shortdown. Even the decentralized exchanges are license and soon the government might want to license us for buying crypto. This might be funny but maybe we should wait for that time.

[paxmao]

If centralized exchange and banks could need licenses then I do not think anything is wrong with casinos having a license even though they accept Bitcoin deposits, this is very important since to avoid casinos becoming used for mixing money and laundering the same.

There is nothing wrong indeed, but it's pointless if you think about it since these are licenses from some random islands across the world with little credibility due to which they aren't exactly reliable.

Also, you don't need licenses to avoid money laundering and mixing. Proper wagering requirements solves those issues effectively.

Several cases around that license casino still used as tool for money laundering that's why its never became effective for stopping this activities since criminals could find ways to bypass the system and continue what they are doing.

That's why I agree that wager requirements can do the trick since it can make those people doubt to fulfill the requirements since there's huge balance will be taken out for them if they decide to use a casino which have rules like that. Also they might get questioned on the activities they do especially if they are dealing with large amount of money there. That's why I really think license is not really important especially if it comes to random countries since for me it doesn't mean anything. This will just add up some requirements which we don't like to submit.

The question still remains. If it is not money then you would not require a licence, that is, whoever is later on changing the crypto into money would need to have that licence and check that the original funds are from legitimate sources. You see, they are putting the burden of proof where it does not belong in this case just to make it easier for themselves to have more control.

[Danydee]

Also, you don't need licenses to avoid money laundering and mixing. Proper wagering requirements solves those issues effectively.

Not so I think.. just placing opposite sports bets from two different accounts (betting on both issues) can show to be cheaper and easier than laundering money the traditional ways !!

[livingfree]

If centralized exchange and banks could need licenses then I do not think anything is wrong with casinos having a license even though they accept Bitcoin deposits, this is very important since to avoid casinos becoming used for mixing money and laundering the same.

It's more of being compliant to the regulators and that's why they're doing the necessary actions to fill that requirement to have the license. Most of them like to operate with a license and if there are casinos that have managed to gain the trust and built their own community without having the license, that had made them exerted a lot of effort.

Most of the time, we have to agree with some facts that can help us to make the best of decisions and also help the casino to avoid many troubles that may come along the way.

And it's just simple, if you don't like to gamble to a certain casino for having a license you stop visiting and playing there. But if it's not really an issue to you then you're free to gamble whenever and however you want.

People basically just looking for a very reliable casino and that's why this becomes a required thing to them. Each of us has the set of requirements that we want to get into before trusting one.

[3kpk3]

Not so I think.. just placing opposite sports bets from two different accounts (betting on both issues) can show to be cheaper and easier than laundering money the traditional ways !!

This is a bad strategy to try and launder money without the books catching on. Why? Because betting on both sides with 1 or 2 accounts would lead to a guaranteed loss thanks to the juice charged by the books.

It could work if they were arbing, but it is also risky to a certain extent especially when dealing with big money.

[Peanutswar]

The same with business anything related or involved with the money that is operating must provide a license and of course, to operate before making a casino you know that your target audience is not only with your community only and its worldwide if that country is one of your largest pool of asset and the government of them want to stop the operation with your casino they can easily banned your domain to their ISP, and also today there's a law implemented which is the AMLA and of course if you want to operate you must need to comply.

[Synchronice]

And a big shout out to those casinos who still working until now without a license, freebitco.in, Just-Dice.com, bustabit.com... They are big examples of how crypto gambling should be.

Freebitco.in is a licensed acsino. When you visit their freebitco.in/signup/ page, scroll down and you'll see licensed by Curaçao image. That's very blurry to be honest but here is the link of their license: Official/Trade name - FBC B.V
The fact that they are licensed is not bad either. For me, being licensed is not a problem, if casino doesn't abuse KYC request and plays fair game, then I like them. Freebitco was operating without a license as far as I know and they got it recently. That probably happened because freebitco offers some more games than just-dice and bustabit. I speculate that it's okay to operate without a license if you only offer in-house games. When you try to add games from providers, like slots, live blackjack and so on, you have to get license to partner with them.

[AprilioMP]

Everything has been arranged and cannot be avoided because freedom has been drowned out by a sense of addiction which has made people lose their consciousness and will rebel consciously when everything is realized as the emphasis you want.

Should I laugh and say welcome to a world full of ambition to create profits for a group of parties at the expense of something that could unmask them in making profits through channels that have been well packaged to look perfect in a system.

[SamReomo]

Not so I think.. just placing opposite sports bets from two different accounts (betting on both issues) can show to be cheaper and easier than laundering money the traditional ways !!

If I'm wrong then that's called sports arbitraging and when a casino finds out about that then they will freeze the funds of both accounts and the one who's operating those accounts will end up with no money.

I don't know that do money launderers use sports arbitrage or not but a few people seem to use that to take advantage of casinos in order to earn fast profits.

Money launderers are much smart these days and they know dozen of ways to clean out the laundered money. And, there's a chance that they might use casinos also for that but I'm not fully sure.

[tbterryboy]

The same with business anything related or involved with the money that is operating must provide a license and of course, to operate before making a casino you know that your target audience is not only with your community only and its worldwide if that country is one of your largest pool of asset and the government of them want to stop the operation with your casino they can easily banned your domain to their ISP, and also today there's a law implemented which is the AMLA and of course if you want to operate you must need to comply.

I believe a casino license usually works in certain jurisdictions and it depends on the licensing firm providing the license about in which regions their license is acceptable. Based on this, a casino or any platform would require to have multiple licenses if they wish to operate worldwide because you can't operate in the USA while having a license that is only for Europe, and the same applies for other continents as well.

Any business willing to work in any part of the world will need to acquire a license that will allow them to operate legally within that jurisdiction. This is the reason why multinational companies have such a good reputation because if a company is operational in multiple nations, it means it's a good company.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

It's fun guys, govs hardly avoid accepting Bitcoin is money, but when it comes to gambling then users are risking money, so, casinos need a license.

Let's be honest, If you can deposit, wager, and withdraw. I don't see where the license is in the process...

Just want to say Fuck Curaçao, the island in the middle of nowhere who decide to take the crypto gambling industry in their hands and make billions of dollars with it. Who the fuck they are to wash money this way?

Crypto gambling needs freedom, and i insist in this point. If you can Deposit, Wager and Widrawal, then you don't need anything else.  And a big shout out to those casinos who still working until now without a license, freebitco.in, Just-Dice.com, bustabit.com... They are big examples of how crypto gambling should be.

        -   Until now, most governments in the world are still against Bitcoin, and most governments even prefer to regulate most of the casinos under their power and regulation because they benefit more from it than Bitcoin.

Anyway, as you said, mate, I am also interested in casinos that are under decentralization and do not have to follow the regulations set by the government. But there are also others who are somehow still helped by regulated casinos.

[shield132]

I think that is not the basic principle about licensing. For me, if a gambling site operates and accept money, that means they need a license in order for them to be regulated. The government can't tax a gambling site if they aren't regulated because they'll be unknown to them, so it doesn't make sense that there's no exemption on a gambling site and will be given a freedom to operate without a license.

Look at the title - Why do they need a license if Bitcoin is not money?. The government says that Bitcoin is not money, so technically if a gambling casino accepts Bitcoin payments, that doesn't mean they are accepting money, that's why OP asks, why they need to acquire a license if Bitcoin is not money.
I think that casinos need to acquire licenses because they offer slots, live blackjack, live roulette and other games that are provided by 3rd parties. For example, when you run a bitcoin casino and have Evolution Live Blackjack, a user plays with cash on that table, so you need a license. If a casino offers only in-house games, like bustabit and freebitco.in, then I think you don't need a license, that's why they are without a license and have never had a problem with authorities.

[Wiwo]

"bitcoin is money or not" there is a specific classification that changes from country to country.
OP you should keep in mind that the majority of compliance arise from requests to complete KYC procedures.
I don't see casinos that have this type of license in a negative way.
There are systems that "by default" cannot be regulated or managed... I would suggest focusing on these if you don't accept this step through a centralized entity.

The subject of Bitcoin and casinos or KYC to me is unrelated,  because casinos must implement KYC regardless of whether they accept Bitcoin or not because even with fiat casinos also demand for kyc at some point, so you are very right to say that, it right to say that countries are who make the laws and also put kyc requirements and regardless of the nature of the casino so long it is a centralized casino.

So the thing has to go along with the perception and location of the casino and the community and what the government policy said about KYC.

[EarnOnVictor]

If centralized exchange and banks could need licenses then I do not think anything is wrong with casinos having a license even though they accept Bitcoin deposits, this is very important since to avoid casinos becoming used for mixing money and laundering the same.

There is nothing wrong indeed, but it's pointless if you think about it since these are licenses from some random islands across the world with little credibility due to which they aren't exactly reliable.

Also, you don't need licenses to avoid money laundering and mixing. Proper wagering requirements solves those issues effectively.

I align with you on this and I've known this during my initial trading days, they overrate the registering nad regulations but it doesn't matter, it doesn't have to be what to sue to know the best companies, it is tehri deeds that will speak of them, and not licencing. Even these days, you see many of them registering at an island, and they are rushing there for a reason, and that reason can only mena a weak regulautions, they just wnat to eb soemwhat free vene though they are bearing the sttaus of bieg lincens and regulated, but in prctiae, it is not so. Stil, registeration oir not, there are good nad bad caisnos all ariund you, let your thourough resercah choose cleverl for you and not the licnecing, that's what I am trying to say.

Alos, I think what @Ojima-ojo is trying to say is beyound what you replied to, Btcoin can't hide us, it can be decentralised but thsoe companies that are attrcting customers nad collecting tehri money for gmabling purpose are not decnetralised, so this calls for tehir regulations. It is now left to them how they manouvere their way to do other shaddy deals (that's if they do it at all), all that matters is that they obey the law of the land where they operate from, at least in the surfce eve if they are paying only a "eye service."

[Fivestar4everMVP]

"bitcoin is money or not" there is a specific classification that changes from country to country.
OP you should keep in mind that the majority of compliance arise from requests to complete KYC procedures.
I don't see casinos that have this type of license in a negative way.
There are systems that "by default" cannot be regulated or managed... I would suggest focusing on these if you don't accept this step through a centralized entity.

The subject of Bitcoin and casinos or KYC to me is unrelated,  because casinos must implement KYC regardless of whether they accept Bitcoin or not because even with fiat casinos also demand for kyc at some point, so you are very right to say that, it right to say that countries are who make the laws and also put kyc requirements and regardless of the nature of the casino so long it is a centralized casino.

So the thing has to go along with the perception and location of the casino and the community and what the government policy said about KYC.

Fiat casinos are the first casinos that implement kyc, in some fiat only casinos today, we may likely find some casinos where after registration, you will be immediately required to submit your kyc documents, and pass the verification before you will be able to make a deposit and start playing on the casino, without passing the kyc verification, you won't be allowed to do anything on the casino.

Crypto currency casinos used to be the ones where gamblers are not required to submit their personal information or pass kyc verification, Infact, there used to be no kyc feature implemented on crypto casinos.
But unfortunately, this days, things have completely changed, with some countries starting to regulate cryptocurrencies, kyc verification have become mandatory for gamblers using crypto currency casinos.
And you are right, kyc has nothing to do with whether a casino accepts bitcoin or not, both crypto and non crypto casinos all now require their customers to pass kyc verification.

[seoincorporation]

I think that is not the basic principle about licensing. For me, if a gambling site operates and accept money, that means they need a license in order for them to be regulated. The government can't tax a gambling site if they aren't regulated because they'll be unknown to them, so it doesn't make sense that there's no exemption on a gambling site and will be given a freedom to operate without a license.

Look at the title - Why do they need a license if Bitcoin is not money?. The government says that Bitcoin is not money, so technically if a gambling casino accepts Bitcoin payments, that doesn't mean they are accepting money, that's why OP asks, why they need to acquire a license if Bitcoin is not money.
I think that casinos need to acquire licenses because they offer slots, live blackjack, live roulette and other games that are provided by 3rd parties. For example, when you run a bitcoin casino and have Evolution Live Blackjack, a user plays with cash on that table, so you need a license. If a casino offers only in-house games, like bustabit and freebitco.in, then I think you don't need a license, that's why they are without a license and have never had a problem with authorities.

That's a great answer, the license is a part of the 3rd party games, and is the way to trust those non-provably fair games. Some users like to play those fancy slots even if they can't verify the rolls, but they feel the game was fair for the simple fact that the site has a license.

Just to conclude the topic, a license is not a warranty for the users. We have seen a lot of licensed casinos who has a terrible reputation, but their marketing strategies is so strong that they keep getting new users, and more than 50% of those new users will end up having a bad experience.

[Wiwo]

That is it,  so for that, we shouldn't have so much mixed up as to what Bitcoin have to do with KYC implementation because have no linking point, and at some point,  those that are speaking of such are just trying to create unnecessary arguments and not really being so much with indept knowledge or ability to differentiate both from each other.

Bitcoin is money,  because bitcoican be use for exchange of good and services and at rhat we need to take it that way,  and not be overly concern about Bitcoin interferences with kyc or what make casino to demand for KYC from Bitcoin users.