Do you think casinos can stop demanding KYC?

[Slow death]

Casinos existed without the need for KYC's until the government made it a requirement, and they started demanding it. IMO If the government no longer requires casinos to do KYC verification for new gamblers, casinos will go ahead and still do KYC verifications because they have seen the benefits of knowing their customers better than when they just allowed people to come onto their platform and gamble without their knowledge of who they were. What do you think? Do you think some casino's will revert back to non-KYC and allow money launderers, plus other fraudulent people have their easy way with them as a way to attract customers, or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

Most people started to see the internet as a different world from the real world, in which the rules and laws of the real world did not apply on the internet. but that thought is wrong, if you look in your country you will see that any physical casino in your country has a license issued by the government of your country, you will see that all physical casinos in your country pay taxes, employees have contracts, the government carries out inspections in casino machines and casino finances to prevent game manipulation and money laundering. The government requires that the casino does not allow minors to enter, at the door of the physical casino there are security guards who ask for documents and when someone inside the casino wins money they must hand over a document to be paid

So if in the real world governments demand that land-based casinos comply with money laundering laws, have licenses, pay taxes, and not allow minors, why would it be wrong for governments to ask the same thing of online casinos? Why shouldn't online casinos respect the laws like physical casinos? It just doesn't make any sense. I also hate kyc, but I do it because I respect the laws and the TOS and there is no way to go back to the time when governments didn't ask for licenses and kyc, because as I said before, land-based casinos have been asking for the same thing since many years. so it was expected that online casinos would also be required to comply with the laws

[michellee]

Casinos could eliminate the need to perform KYC if the government no longer requires verification for casino members. But it all depends on each casino whether they will continue to do KYC or eliminate it. If it was a crypto casino, the casino would write it off and it would go back to the way it was.

But we know that's hard to do because the government won't do it. The government also benefits from KYC for gamblers. They know that the gambling industry can provide a lot of income for their country.

If there were casinos that could eliminate KYC for their members, that would be good news for us crypto gamblers. We don't need to do KYC anymore like before. We'll see what the government will do, but it looks like the government will continue as it is now asking for KYC.

[Apocollapse]

As  much as I dislike kyc in my own little way, I can say that kyc in casinos have helped prevent many illegalities and impersonations within the industry among gamblers, the inimical aspect of kyc is that it intrude and expose our privacy which ought to be a right of the individual.

What about the casino got hacked and then after few months or years, a criminal use your identity and then the police caught you're a criminal?

I do not think that casinos will ask kyc if there is no intervention by the government. Because they want to make business without any interruption and not to govr headache to their customers.

Correct, if they know the most easiest way to run a casino and make everyone happy, they will do it. Why they need to follow unnecessary regulations which would make them to spend more money and effort.

They can't say "no KYC" or will not implement it since they have a license and they are pretty much aware that if they will violate the guidelines of their license, they will loss it through revocation of license.

Actually, there are few casinos that promote "No KYC" in this forum, but they actually have KYC rules in their terms.

[SATWAT]

As  much as I dislike kyc in my own little way, I can say that kyc in casinos have helped prevent many illegalities and impersonations within the industry among gamblers, the inimical aspect of kyc is that it intrude and expose our privacy which ought to be a right of the individual.

What about the casino got hacked and then after few months or years, a criminal use your identity and then the police caught you're a criminal?

I do not think that casinos will ask kyc if there is no intervention by the government. Because they want to make business without any interruption and not to govr headache to their customers.

Correct, if they know the most easiest way to run a casino and make everyone happy, they will do it. Why they need to follow unnecessary regulations which would make them to spend more money and effort.

They can't say "no KYC" or will not implement it since they have a license and they are pretty much aware that if they will violate the guidelines of their license, they will loss it through revocation of license.

Actually, there are few casinos that promote "No KYC" in this forum, but they actually have KYC rules in their terms.

Now as time is running out we are losing this all because mostly decentralized casino's want to follow Government rules and regulations without them, they can't do their business so we have to follow them without this now things are getting worst even this is also creating more problems but still now we are doing good which is helpful for them and all stakeholders.
But one thing is good still if someone want to live without this KYC then he can do on few casinos but their games and limits are problems which are not satisfying gamblers so they have to go for this all which is now must use case for them.

[Lida93]

As  much as I dislike kyc in my own little way, I can say that kyc in casinos have helped prevent many illegalities and impersonations within the industry among gamblers, the inimical aspect of kyc is that it intrude and expose our privacy which ought to be a right of the individual.

What about the casino got hacked and then after few months or years, a criminal use your identity and then the police caught you're a criminal?

That's why if you could recall in the ending part of my first comment where you quoted I clearly stated in condemnation of the kyc as a means of exposure of our privacy in terms of our data/identity that a third party can gain access to and implicate us using our identity. And the example you had just used with casino hack paints a good picture of what I was implying among many things about the inimical side of kyc to users using centralized platforms in general

[Findingnemo]

Casinos may not go back to old policies but there will be hundreds of other new casinos that will pop up with No KYC requirements so now what you will pick if it's between KYC required platform or a No KYC platform?

That sums up the purpose of this discussion so platforms will be forced back to what customers prefer if they want to be making profits.

At last, this is highly unlikely to happen that government will no longer require KYC.

[Zoomic]

As  much as I dislike kyc in my own little way, I can say that kyc in casinos have helped prevent many illegalities and impersonations within the industry among gamblers, the inimical aspect of kyc is that it intrude and expose our privacy which ought to be a right of the individual.

What about the casino got hacked and then after few months or years, a criminal use your identity and then the police caught you're a criminal?

That's why if you could recall in the ending part of my first comment where you quoted I clearly stated in condemnation of the kyc as a means of exposure of our privacy in terms of our data/identity that a third party can gain access to and implicate us using our identity. And the example you had just used with casino hack paints a good picture of what I was implying among many things about the inimical side of kyc to users using centralized platforms in general

I am one of the few persons who see nothing wrong in a casino demanding for KYC verification whether as required by the government of the country where they do business or on the casino's own accord. Quite a lot of time, we complain of minors getting themselves involved in gambling activities and some malpractices carried out by some fraudulent people who disguise themselves as gamblers.  One way for checking for all this is through KYC. It is good that we have casinos that don't demand for KYC as well as casinos that demand for KYC verifications. Gamblers should just patronize casinos they are comfortable with instead of worrying about what KYC or no KYC will do to their privacy and personal security.

[Beparanf]

Casinos may not go back to old policies but there will be hundreds of other new casinos that will pop up with No KYC requirements so now what you will pick if it's between KYC required platform or a No KYC platform?

That sums up the purpose of this discussion so platforms will be forced back to what customers prefer if they want to be making profits.

At last, this is highly unlikely to happen that government will no longer require KYC.

God knows that this new casino that offers no KYC and at the same time have bonus will surely regret their decision since we already witnessed a lot of new casino that suffer a massive loss after being abused by cheaters who exploit their bonus.

No serious business will dare to remove KYC unless they doesn't offer bonus because cheaters will surely drain hard their bankroll using their bonuses until they win huge on slot games by multiple attempts. 

[dothebeats]

Even before KYCs, online casinos have systems in place to check for fraudulent activities and monitor their players to see if they are abiding by the existing ToS or not. They have all of these to ensure that they are not being cheated by someone and that all of the money flows directly to their pockets. There are some benefits to KYCs even if it's not mandated by the government and there might be some casinos who will continuously implement this on their platforms, but the majority would probably just don't implement it as it reduces the systems they would need to allocate resources to.

[alegotardo]

Casinos existed without the need for KYC's until the government made it a requirement, and they started demanding it. IMO If the government no longer requires casinos to do KYC verification for new gamblers, casinos will go ahead and still do KYC verifications because they have seen the benefits of knowing their customers better than when they just allowed people to come onto their platform and gamble without their knowledge of who they were. What do you think? Do you think some casino's will revert back to non-KYC and allow money launderers, plus other fraudulent people have their easy way with them as a way to attract customers, or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

I agree that KYC is not a government requirement, so much so that no government has ever imposed conduct procedures on exchanges or casinos regarding what to do in relation to customers of a given platform.
So, see KYC as an auxiliary tool for casinos to get to know their customers better, know that they really are who they claim to be and thus have less risk of internal fraud and also to have reasons that justify a "minimum of control" and present this information to governments if they are accused of facilitating money laundering.

You see, not even in physical casinos, which have been known for laundering money for years, there is such a history of KYC requirements. Is it because governments were "softer"? Certainly not.
KYC is above all laws, security for the website itself, as it does not know who is accessing its website.

So, even if the government is no longer required to have as much control over fraud, I believe that KYC will continue to be required.

[Miles2006]

When it comes to gambling I prefer KYC but, definitely not everyone will want to provide their personal information just for casino site, from my perspective it’s good cause it’s another form of verification and security. Aside gambling, you’ll discover almost all site will want to know every single detail and it’s required you fill everything before you can access the website for example investment assurance scheme, loan site, etc. if any user is absolutely good such user will not fear giving out their KYC but we should be careful cause sometimes most websites are not worth giving out our private information. It’s likely those government know all the KYC of every gamblers but, not all site will share customers KYC with the government in terms of gambling from my observation unless the government is interested , I’m aware that banks work hand to hand with the state government so we can fully say the government gave order and demanded for every bank users KYC, it’s difficult to agree concerning gambling if government made the law about KYC or not.

[YOSHIE]

or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

As far as I know, the KYC applied by online casinos to users has nothing to do with the government, the government and casinos have different paths, the government only provides licenses, It's not that KYC is the casino's own policy. It has nothing to do with whether KYC is regulated by the government, whether it is mandatory or not.
 
Many online casinos do not require kyc users, i wonder, how someone launders money in an online casino....!

My understanding is that online casinos will never stop KYC, this feature is useful for the casino itself to prevent unwanted things and KYC functions for the casino itself, I don't think KYC will ever disappear from casinos, regardless of what the government responds to.

[aioc]

KYC is the casinos' way to implement their terms and trace cheaters, it's not only the government requirements, but casinos also do not want to be a playground of launderers and cheaters and KYC prevents this.

KYC is here to stay casinos are doing good and make the operation safe for players and for the platforms.
I don't think things will change even if the government imposes or does not impose it.

[Alphakilo]

What do you think? Do you think some casino's will revert back to non-KYC and allow money launderers, plus other fraudulent people have their easy way with them as a way to attract customers, or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

This can only happen in a dystopian society where society has fallen apart. Where there is the absence of law and order, of justice. Where criminals will replace good people and crime reigns free.

But even criminals live by a set of rules, a code that guides their actions and binds them. Nevertheless, since we are living in the age and time where there is information technology there would always be in need for kyc requirements regardless of whether the government who gives a damn about it or not. Data collation which important.

[Yatsan]

If they wat to, then yes. However same goes with casinos and gambling providers who requires such procedure to their players. Not to give certainty but so far I never had any problem with complying to KYC process however, I still cannot blame those who are against it; if you're one then there are still platforms wherein this is not a requirement. We cannot really force a platform to change their policy. As customers, what we can do is to only comply if it is being practiced on them.

As  much as I dislike kyc in my own little way, I can say that kyc in casinos have helped prevent many illegalities and impersonations within the industry among gamblers, the inimical aspect of kyc is that it intrude and expose our privacy which ought to be a right of the individual.

What about the casino got hacked and then after few months or years, a criminal use your identity and then the police caught you're a criminal?

That's why if you could recall in the ending part of my first comment where you quoted I clearly stated in condemnation of the kyc as a means of exposure of our privacy in terms of our data/identity that a third party can gain access to and implicate us using our identity. And the example you had just used with casino hack paints a good picture of what I was implying among many things about the inimical side of kyc to users using centralized platforms in general

I am one of the few persons who see nothing wrong in a casino demanding for KYC verification whether as required by the government of the country where they do business or on the casino's own accord. Quite a lot of time, we complain of minors getting themselves involved in gambling activities and some malpractices carried out by some fraudulent people who disguise themselves as gamblers.  One way for checking for all this is through KYC. It is good that we have casinos that don't demand for KYC as well as casinos that demand for KYC verifications. Gamblers should just patronize casinos they are comfortable with instead of worrying about what KYC or no KYC will do to their privacy and personal security.

I agree, we have our own preferences of things and on the same extent we have a choice and we have options in the first place. If you're uncomfortable of doing this procedure rhen that is valid than to just be forced to do so and regret it afterwards. What's best as well is to find the right platforms that would free you from worries.

[uneng]

Casinos existed without the need for KYC's until the government made it a requirement, and they started demanding it. IMO If the government no longer requires casinos to do KYC verification for new gamblers, casinos will go ahead and still do KYC verifications because they have seen the benefits of knowing their customers better than when they just allowed people to come onto their platform and gamble without their knowledge of who they were. What do you think?

I don't think so. If for some reason regulators stopped enforcing KYC from casinos in order to allow them operating their businesses, I don't think casinos would keep the feature by their own wish, because they know how inconvenient it is for their customers, therefore prejudicing the business, as gamblers tend to avoid intrusive and bureaucratic services which keep demanding personal informations and formal procedures for them in order to play or cashout funds.

Do you think some casino's will revert back to non-KYC and allow money launderers, plus other fraudulent people have their easy way with them as a way to attract customers, or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

Most of them would revert the feature, I suppose. And it would work like it used to be in the early days of crypto industry, when sign up process was simple, clean and instant. However, it's just an hypothetical scenario you are drawing, which in fact I'm pretty sure has 0% of happening for real, because in no way governments are going to remove their regulations.

[Awaklara]

Do you think some casino's will revert back to non-KYC and allow money launderers, plus other fraudulent people have their easy way with them as a way to attract customers, or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

those under government authority will continue to run their casino business with KYC verification. then we can call it a legal casino. and from another point of view, when a casino does not meet the government's requirements, we can call it an illegal casino.
the government will not let everyone go free. The casino business is not only profitable for business people. but also for the government which has managed it well.
regardless of whether the casino is committing fraud or not. but if you are a non-problem gambler, I don't think there will be any problems with the KYC required by the casino.

[acroman08]

Do you think some casino's will revert back to non-KYC and allow money launderers, plus other fraudulent people have their easy way with them as a way to attract customers, or since they recognize the personal benefits of KYC to their casino, will continue demanding it even if it affects their customers?

Maybe those who are a strong believer of anonymous gambling, but majority probably wouldn't. I mean KYC do act as an extra protection for their gambling site and I don't think they would want to lose that. Also, I feel like they would rather lose some costumer that lose the security KYC provide.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

       -     I believe that the KYC is only applicable to regulated casinos, as we know, because this is what the government wants; they want to see the full earnings of their constituents. That's why traditional casinos cannot have DTI, business permits, Sec, and others.

But if there is no KYC, of course that is applicable to Dex casinos. The bad thing is that Dex platform casinos ask for KYC from their gamblers, and when this happens, that is a red flag to me.

[coin-investor]

It's not only the gambling casinos that asked for KYC online and offline platforms that have a seller-customer relationship it is the protection of both sellers and customers to see to it that the platforms are true to what the platform demands of their customers.

In online casinos, it's being used to trace cheaters and launderers, they need to protect their platform and KYC is a good method to trace scammers and cheaters, casinos are successful in tracing bad players using KYC so I don't think casinos will do away KYC even if it's unpopular to players.