What's even the point of licenses anymore?

[Hispo]

Since UK and USA are stricter when their license holders, thise licenses could be arguably more useful to prevent scams and lack of liquidity.

Well, that's a very good thing, so all the regulations should adopt the same rules as those in the USA and the UK, because in the end what matters is the player's security. It's very easy for someone to scam or steal from a player, and everything is for nothing, because we already have a problem with KYC; that data will somehow end up on other servers in the face of attacks. That's something we should think about, so DSI licenses should provide that security.

The problem is how licenses are technically a markets and the laxer one licenses is for the casino, the demand for that license will be higher than the rest.
Let us imagine you are an enterpreneur and you wish to start you own casino with a fixed initial investment. You could go for a license issued by the United Kingdom, but those are more expensive and they would require you to have offices in the UK and a big bankroll to secure your operations, on the other hand Caribbean licenses are cheaper and laxer, and covers many countries.
So naturally, the latter is the option the majority of casinos go for, unless they specifically wish to cater UK, USA or other countries which cannot be served with a Caribbean license.

[Perfectbaby]

Having license by a casino is not a measure to entrust them with our integrity not to perform a shady act, some already knew that is a tool for them to use so that gamblers quest to know about their reputation and present was not be much questioned, there is much to look after when it all about a casino reputation and trust and having license is just maybe one out of the other parameters that you ensure were being in place, so many gambling platforms undergo being regulated and at the end of the day you may not like what the offers right from the policies they made down to your experience with them.

This means that nothing about quality and that obtaining a license becomes a tool to buy some credibility in front of noth authorities and users. But in reality, those licenses didn't forbid some casinos from scamming their users. We have a lot of examples here in the forum. I don't remember any case that the license issuer interfered to claim his position in one of the disputes. Those issuers just ask for money and the casino just want the license as a testimony to show to the authorities that require an activity license and to users who still nelieve the license is still a guarantee for safe use.

Having license doesn't really guaranteed that the casino would not scam people who are gambling on that particular website, but people so much believed that a license casinos can't bridge users trust, and as a matter of fact being licensed is like a free access for people to keep trooping on that particular gambling site.
As a gambler, you must know your right in regards to the gambling site that are being licensed. Of course you are right, the license is like a general access to operate in some other countries if that covers all those areas.

[Ishicryptic]

Makes sense that getting an official license inspires more confidence and trust.  Sure, we could debate whether the bureaucracy matters much, but for most gamblers, seeing that stamp of approval suggests the place aims to follow industry rules and isnt just some fly-by-night scam. 

Me personally I would rather play it safe and stick to certified sites, even if their regulations seem like useless red tape.  It aint worth the risk messing around with unlicensed ones when there is plenty of trustworthy, transparent operators out there.  but I get why some folks dont care either way.

Most gamblers just want to play it safe and register on casinos that have these licences and that are regulated in their country, it gives them confidence that atleast to a large extent they won't be scammed by the casinos, although these licences doesn't automatically mean that a casino under a recognized license cannot try to swindle a winner. I think that gamblers just want to hold onto something that suggests that they are staking their money in a recognized casino with a reputable license issuer, if they get scammed by the casino they'll atleast justify to themselves that they didn't just rush into a casino without doing any research about them. But I want to believe that casinos issue aquire these Curacao licenses and come under regulations to give gamblers assurance that they are genuine and should be trusted, although it is their services that will truly prove that they are trustworthy not the certificates.

[swogerino]

Since UK and USA are stricter when their license holders, thise licenses could be arguably more useful to prevent scams and lack of liquidity.

Well, that's a very good thing, so all the regulations should adopt the same rules as those in the USA and the UK, because in the end what matters is the player's security. It's very easy for someone to scam or steal from a player, and everything is for nothing, because we already have a problem with KYC; that data will somehow end up on other servers in the face of attacks. That's something we should think about, so DSI licenses should provide that security.

The problem is how licenses are technically a markets and the laxer one licenses is for the casino, the demand for that license will be higher than the rest.
Let us imagine you are an enterpreneur and you wish to start you own casino with a fixed initial investment. You could go for a license issued by the United Kingdom, but those are more expensive and they would require you to have offices in the UK and a big bankroll to secure your operations, on the other hand Caribbean licenses are cheaper and laxer, and covers many countries.
So naturally, the latter is the option the majority of casinos go for, unless they specifically wish to cater UK, USA or other countries which cannot be served with a Caribbean license.

License are put in place from a business perspective but also to protect players from troubles that may arise during game play. If a gambler wins the jackpot and the company voids it without reason then the gambler can start legal action course against the casino and if that casino does not have a valid license well known and approved internationally then this gambler legal action will be in vain as no authority has power over such casino. So that is why licenses remain important even nowadays. Most of us may say we will never need to use this but who knows maybe we win a jackpot that we have to validate it and so a casino with a license is the way to go.

[Somegory]

Is Curacao responsible for all the licensing of casinos in the world? The answer is no, so why not avoid all the casinos that are not related to Curacao licensing? Why not use online casinos from America or somewhere else?

See gambling is not a do or die affair for me, and it's why I don't bother myself with all this license and KYC problems because I don't care, I risk too small money to be this burdened on myself.

Reputation is more than enough, this forum is more than enough, to look for a reliable online casinos this forum can find the answer, I don't have to go too deep like this, even Stake alone can satisfy my urge in gambling.

[PERtua]

Since UK and USA are stricter when their license holders, thise licenses could be arguably more useful to prevent scams and lack of liquidity.

Well, that's a very good thing, so all the regulations should adopt the same rules as those in the USA and the UK, because in the end what matters is the player's security. It's very easy for someone to scam or steal from a player, and everything is for nothing, because we already have a problem with KYC; that data will somehow end up on other servers in the face of attacks. That's something we should think about, so DSI licenses should provide that security.

The problem is how licenses are technically a markets and the laxer one licenses is for the casino, the demand for that license will be higher than the rest.
Let us imagine you are an enterpreneur and you wish to start you own casino with a fixed initial investment. You could go for a license issued by the United Kingdom, but those are more expensive and they would require you to have offices in the UK and a big bankroll to secure your operations, on the other hand Caribbean licenses are cheaper and laxer, and covers many countries.
So naturally, the latter is the option the majority of casinos go for, unless they specifically wish to cater UK, USA or other countries which cannot be served with a Caribbean license.

I believe that is why it is no longer sufficient to just look at a license to assess a casino. A strict regulator such as the UK will provide more consumer protection, but the expense and compliance will drive many startups to opt for cheaper regulators in other jurisdictions. However not all offshore licensed casinos are necessarily unreliable. But players should not only rely on the license. Considering that some of the most reliable sites have been around for years and years, and provide a good reputation, active community feedback, and transparent terms, one might think that seeing a licensing badge on the home page would be a better sign of reliability.

[OsaiEmma]

So what's even the point of a license anymore? Soon there won't be any more obscure island nations left to issue title licenses that mean nothing further than their name. So what's going to be the next stem of casinos? Invent their own licensing authority in an obscure island? Who knows.
But the point is, why are casinos even bothering to pay for the issuance of these licenses when we all know they mean nothing? Might as well just go without a license. Why not?

I think one of the purpose of a license is to create authenticity. Gambling is a serious business that carries severe adverse effect on people and in some cases the economy too, so it is seen as illegal in some jurisdictions. For it to be seen as legal and impartial, it needs serious regulation and proof of authenticity.

Having a license shows they have the rights and capabilities to operate a gambling site which gives a sense of legitimacy. Now it feels a kinda pointless to have licenses because offshore license bodies can't exactly protect players, but the thing is, without a license, these casinos can't meet B2B compliance (business-to-business compliance). Payment services and iGaming software providers won't exactly partner with a 100% unlicensed casino. So most times these licenses are not only for players (although it provides credibility and trust to players), but to launch their platforms and satisfy B2B compliance requirements.

So whether we argue that casinos having licenses is useless or not, they just can't fully operate without one; be it from offshore or within that jurisdiction.

[purple_sparkles]

Since UK and USA are stricter when their license holders, thise licenses could be arguably more useful to prevent scams and lack of liquidity.

Well, that's a very good thing, so all the regulations should adopt the same rules as those in the USA and the UK, because in the end what matters is the player's security. It's very easy for someone to scam or steal from a player, and everything is for nothing, because we already have a problem with KYC; that data will somehow end up on other servers in the face of attacks. That's something we should think about, so DSI licenses should provide that security.

The problem is how licenses are technically a markets and the laxer one licenses is for the casino, the demand for that license will be higher than the rest.
Let us imagine you are an enterpreneur and you wish to start you own casino with a fixed initial investment. You could go for a license issued by the United Kingdom, but those are more expensive and they would require you to have offices in the UK and a big bankroll to secure your operations, on the other hand Caribbean licenses are cheaper and laxer, and covers many countries.
So naturally, the latter is the option the majority of casinos go for, unless they specifically wish to cater UK, USA or other countries which cannot be served with a Caribbean license.

I believe that is why it is no longer sufficient to just look at a license to assess a casino. A strict regulator such as the UK will provide more consumer protection, but the expense and compliance will drive many startups to opt for cheaper regulators in other jurisdictions. However not all offshore licensed casinos are necessarily unreliable. But players should not only rely on the license. Considering that some of the most reliable sites have been around for years and years, and provide a good reputation, active community feedback, and transparent terms, one might think that seeing a licensing badge on the home page would be a better sign of reliability.

Licensing gives people a sense of security and confidence that certain standards and requirements are being met, which is important for consumers. If something goes wrong, at least they have some level of protection when they see that a casino is officially licensed. That's why I think licensing is important. However, I would separate casino licensing from KYC requirements for users. The personal information collected through KYC could end up in the wrong hands in one way or another, and that could cause harm.

[samadam007]

Having license doesn't really guaranteed that the casino would not scam people who are gambling on that particular website, but people so much believed that a license casinos can't bridge users trust, and as a matter of fact being licensed is like a free access for people to keep trooping on that particular gambling site.
As a gambler, you must know your right in regards to the gambling site that are being licensed. Of course you are right, the license is like a general access to operate in some other countries if that covers all those areas.

You’re right about license not being a guarantee that gamblers can’t be scammed, but I don’t think it’s right to belittle importance of them having it. I think gamblers should make it their priority to know the agency that issued the casino license, not only worrying about if they have it

Good license require casino to follow rules, use fair games and give players a way to file whatever complaint they have. Though it does not remove risks, but it gives players more protection than an unlicensed casino. Gamblers should not trust anyhow casino just because they claim to have license. Go ahead to check their reputation, read reviews and see how they treat other gamblers

[Africolo]

Curacao used to be the main gambling license online casinos used to operate under. Their licensing structure was very shady. They had licensed 4 main title holders long ago and in turn these were issuing sub-licensed to anyone for very cheap.

Fast forward to more recent years, Curacao tries to overhaul their entire licensing process. Now entities who want a Curacao license must open a corporation there and apply for a much more expensive license that will be issued directly under the local state authorities.

Sounds much better than before as the path to seek liability would be much more direct. But there are several practical issues here. For instance, although Curacao's new licensing scheme is in full effect now, there's still no alternative resolution path that casinos under this licensing scheme have to follow. If anyone wants to go after them to find justice, the only way is local courts.

However, it has become apparent that even with these changes, online casinos will simply chainge their credentials and license, to start operating under a Comoros license to avoid judgments against them.

I can share a couple of very characteristic examples that involve casinos we're all familiar with:
1. https://igamingbusiness.com/legal-compliance/bc-game-curacao-bankruptcy/
2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5534261.0


So what's even the point of a license anymore? Soon there won't be any more obscure island nations left to issue title licenses that mean nothing further than their name. So what's going to be the next stem of casinos? Invent their own licensing authority in an obscure island? Who knows.
But the point is, why are casinos even bothering to pay for the issuance of these licenses when we all know they mean nothing? Might as well just go without a license. Why not?

Well, having a license to some extent give the gambler some trust that the casinos are unique and even though they will be scammed but it shows some level of security that the individual will have towards it. It's very essential that everyone gambling should know the particular license that the casinos have and who licensed them because it's important and will safeguard the users incase of fraudulent activities on the board.

Having a license gives the player some leverage to fair games and bookmarks because they will be regulated properly to do what is right once they are licensed and they will also follow all the rules that are given. I can't give my kyc information to a casino that is not licensed because if you have any issues there won't be any platform for you to log your complaints and you will feel less protected if there is no license binding them, so it's very important to gamble with a license casinos.

[qurbanshah02]

Having license doesn't really guaranteed that the casino would not scam people who are gambling on that particular website, but people so much believed that a license casinos can't bridge users trust, and as a matter of fact being licensed is like a free access for people to keep trooping on that particular gambling site.
As a gambler, you must know your right in regards to the gambling site that are being licensed. Of course you are right, the license is like a general access to operate in some other countries if that covers all those areas.

You’re right about license not being a guarantee that gamblers can’t be scammed, but I don’t think it’s right to belittle importance of them having it. I think gamblers should make it their priority to know the agency that issued the casino license, not only worrying about if they have it

Good license require casino to follow rules, use fair games and give players a way to file whatever complaint they have. Though it does not remove risks, but it gives players more protection than an unlicensed casino. Gamblers should not trust anyhow casino just because they claim to have license. Go ahead to check their reputation, read reviews and see how they treat other gamblers

They should get a license based on their ability and honesty in 1 year but it is not very important because it can give them a good opportunity to change their casino. The license will be given based on their need, that is, some people can bring some wrong evidence for them which puts them in danger, they can get a license based on it, otherwise it is not good for them to get a license just because they say it is a real casino. It also depends on the license releasers on what kind of performance they provide it to them. Because if there are some things for them, looking at which they have released the license. If someone reaches the instructions given by them, then he must get the license and take advantage of it. Because of all these things, they will get this card and they will make more confidence for themselves based on it and when they come to cheating, they will blacklist him due to which their casino will not be able to get a license again.

[DPHOR]

Licensing gives people a sense of security and confidence that certain standards and requirements are being met, which is important for consumers. If something goes wrong, at least they have some level of protection when they see that a casino is officially licensed. That's why I think licensing is important. However, I would separate casino licensing from KYC requirements for users. The personal information collected through KYC could end up in the wrong hands in one way or another, and that could cause harm.

You are right, when you talks about licensing you are talking about cordiaty's among the operated countries where all the gamblers wouldn't be that panicked over these gambling sites. At least if they are operating they are working in compliance with some regulatory laws and regulations whereby a common individual can sue them when feels so cheated or found out that they aren't being handled properly in respect to their operational laws.

[Bitcoin Smith]

It is the users who think that when a casino have license, it won't scam the users or the games are properly audited and there is no possibility of rig. I don't know about others but I would trust a casino with no license but have no history of unresolved scam accusations against them and they are actually trying to address any issue reported by the users instead of hiding them under the rug with many possible ways.

Like one casino just bribed a mod on bitcointalk to keep their name a bit clean.

[Versatile_choice]

Licensing gives people a sense of security and confidence that certain standards and requirements are being met, which is important for consumers. If something goes wrong, at least they have some level of protection when they see that a casino is officially licensed. That's why I think licensing is important. However, I would separate casino licensing from KYC requirements for users. The personal information collected through KYC could end up in the wrong hands in one way or another, and that could cause harm.

You're right about that, licensing is also part of the things that qualifies a casino. Personally I used to check if a casinos has a license before joining them, I know some gamblers wouldn't mind so Long as they have meet up thier requirements like options, bonus offer, and other things. Of course there are gamblers who are just after bonus and options forgetting that there are other things that need to be considered before jumping into conclusion that such casino is the best because there are some casinos out there that has good features and also give out bonus but they are not trusted. It is true that having a license doesn't mean that a casino is 100% guaranteed, because they can change at any time but even as that it's best we go for the ones that is licensed.

[goldkingcoiner]

Curacao used to be the main gambling license online casinos used to operate under. Their licensing structure was very shady. They had licensed 4 main title holders long ago and in turn these were issuing sub-licensed to anyone for very cheap.

Fast forward to more recent years, Curacao tries to overhaul their entire licensing process. Now entities who want a Curacao license must open a corporation there and apply for a much more expensive license that will be issued directly under the local state authorities.

Sounds much better than before as the path to seek liability would be much more direct. But there are several practical issues here. For instance, although Curacao's new licensing scheme is in full effect now, there's still no alternative resolution path that casinos under this licensing scheme have to follow. If anyone wants to go after them to find justice, the only way is local courts.

However, it has become apparent that even with these changes, online casinos will simply chainge their credentials and license, to start operating under a Comoros license to avoid judgments against them.

I can share a couple of very characteristic examples that involve casinos we're all familiar with:
1. https://igamingbusiness.com/legal-compliance/bc-game-curacao-bankruptcy/
2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5534261.0


So what's even the point of a license anymore? Soon there won't be any more obscure island nations left to issue title licenses that mean nothing further than their name. So what's going to be the next stem of casinos? Invent their own licensing authority in an obscure island? Who knows.
But the point is, why are casinos even bothering to pay for the issuance of these licenses when we all know they mean nothing? Might as well just go without a license. Why not?

I think the corruption and lax regulation is to blame for licenses becoming worthless. But they do help sort out all the thousands and thousands of rotten scam casinos from the legit but kind of crappy casinos.

I tend to look more at where the license was issued, who the owners of the casino are and how long they have been running.

A casino that has not been running for even a year is not one I would want to visit in the first place.

Reputation and trust must be built over time, slowly. Even if lisences become worthless.

[Nwada001]

You are right, when you talks about licensing you are talking about cordiaty's among the operated countries where all the gamblers wouldn't be that panicked over these gambling sites. At least if they are operating they are working in compliance with some regulatory laws and regulations whereby a common individual can sue them when feels so cheated or found out that they aren't being handled properly in respect to their operational laws.

If licensing authorities are actually doing their job, then players should not be living in failure the way some are, as in some cases it always appears that if the player doesn't have the connection and funds to make their case reach the right authority, it can always end on arrival. Some of these casinos are just hiding behind the licensing authority that they've gotten, while some are actually trying to respect the laws and be fair to players.

[Synchronice]

It is the users who think that when a casino have license, it won't scam the users or the games are properly audited and there is no possibility of rig. I don't know about others but I would trust a casino with no license but have no history of unresolved scam accusations against them and they are actually trying to address any issue reported by the users instead of hiding them under the rug with many possible ways.

Like one casino just bribed a mod on bitcointalk to keep their name a bit clean.

And what should the user think? Licensed means having official permission, a legal permit to run casino business. When they are licensed, people automatically think that they are trustworthy because we all know that licenses aren't given away like a free certificate, you have to deserve them too but sadly, this doesn't apply to online gambling.
Honestly, a Curaçao license is more valuable to the operator than to the player because it doesn't have strong consumer protection and instead is an inexpensive authorization mechanism, it simply gives the business legitimacy and to players, a possible complaint, maybe.

[Hispo]

Since UK and USA are stricter when their license holders, thise licenses could be arguably more useful to prevent scams and lack of liquidity.

Well, that's a very good thing, so all the regulations should adopt the same rules as those in the USA and the UK, because in the end what matters is the player's security. It's very easy for someone to scam or steal from a player, and everything is for nothing, because we already have a problem with KYC; that data will somehow end up on other servers in the face of attacks. That's something we should think about, so DSI licenses should provide that security.

The problem is how licenses are technically a markets and the laxer one licenses is for the casino, the demand for that license will be higher than the rest.
Let us imagine you are an enterpreneur and you wish to start you own casino with a fixed initial investment. You could go for a license issued by the United Kingdom, but those are more expensive and they would require you to have offices in the UK and a big bankroll to secure your operations, on the other hand Caribbean licenses are cheaper and laxer, and covers many countries.
So naturally, the latter is the option the majority of casinos go for, unless they specifically wish to cater UK, USA or other countries which cannot be served with a Caribbean license.

License are put in place from a business perspective but also to protect players from troubles that may arise during game play. If a gambler wins the jackpot and the company voids it without reason then the gambler can start legal action course against the casino and if that casino does not have a valid license well known and approved internationally then this gambler legal action will be in vain as no authority has power over such casino. So that is why licenses remain important even nowadays. Most of us may say we will never need to use this but who knows maybe we win a jackpot that we have to validate it and so a casino with a license is the way to go.

Sure, I can agree with you there, licenses can be instruments set in place in order to protect gamblers and our rights to claim our money when we happen to have much luck and hit the jackpot, but it does not matter whether we can sue or not if the license itself is not one of good quality or if the government who issued the license does not actually care to enforce it's rule over casinos within it's jurisdiction.

Most of us will never be in a situation in which we would need to sue a casino, but that does not mean we are supposed to give up on having good standards on casinos and their legal compliance.

[tiCeR]

...

Sure, I can agree with you there, licenses can be instruments set in place in order to protect gamblers and our rights to claim our money when we happen to have much luck and hit the jackpot, but it does not matter whether we can sue or not if the license itself is not one of good quality or if the government who issued the license does not actually care to enforce it's rule over casinos within it's jurisdiction.

Most of us will never be in a situation in which we would need to sue a casino, but that does not mean we are supposed to give up on having good standards on casinos and their legal compliance.

This is all based on the premise that casino users understand what kind of license a casino has. I have recently come across a post here that explain which license means what and honestly, I never really knew what to watch out for. Most of them have a sign on their website stating that they have a license, but at the end of the day I would prefer to stick with casinos that I have experience with or that have a good reputation among forum users. If there is a new casino trying to lure you into joining with a big bonus and they have this special looking license tag on their website, most of the time I don't know whether that's worth anything.

Most of us will never be in a situation in which we would need to sue a casino

I had minor cases in the past, but it is not that I did not need to sue a casino, but that is just wasn't worth it. I think that can sometimes be the beauty of scamming lower volume players. I suppose nobody would go after a casino for a few hundred dollars. The good thing is that the community here still can raise attention and start a scam accusation and I think it does raise awareness in some cases.

[JiiBs]

Is Curacao responsible for all the licensing of casinos in the world? The answer is no, so why not avoid all the casinos that are not related to Curacao licensing? Why not use online casinos from America or somewhere else?

Reputation is more than enough, this forum is more than enough, to look for a reliable online casinos this forum can find the answer, I don't have to go too deep like this, even Stake alone can satisfy my urge in gambling.

When you say the forum is more than enough, you say it as though the forum gives license documents to casinos for their operation or there haven’t being casinos that operated here and turned out to be scammers. I think one of the worst case that still reverberates from history on the forum and you can find some users with tags has being the case of 1xbit. Even being new to the forum, if you visit the reputation board or search for these things, you would find mentions of them and what they did.

Licensing is very important for casinos and shouldn’t be taken likely. It’s the one thing some gamblers take into account while looking for a reputable casino.

No license simply means, they’ve got a tendency to do something shady. Casinos with license would at least look back to what it took and would take them to remain in operation with a license and are not so likely to do some shady stuff.