Slot Machine with Bad Software Sends Players To Jail 647
dcollins writes "Previous discussions here have turned into debates over who is liable for faulty software: the programmers, the publisher, etc. Yahoo has a new option: perhaps the users are criminally liable for using the software. From the AP: 'Prosecutors are considering criminal charges against casino gamblers who won big on a slot machine that had been installed with faulty software ... A decision on whether to bring criminal charges could come in a couple of weeks, said John Colin, chief deputy prosecutor for Harrison County. He said 'criminal intent' may be involved when people play a machine they know is faulty.' Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?"
Good grief (Score:4, Insightful)
If you put $1 in the machine and got a $10 credit, I should think that the user would figure out that there's more going on than them just being "lucky".
As TFA says, the Casino contacted the winners about the fault, and several of them agreed to give back their winnings. (Total losses for the casino were nearly $500,000.) Criminal charges are being considered for the remainder of the two dozen people who exploited the machine. Those charges would result in the gambler getting hauled before a judge and made to prove that he thought that he was just "lucky" when the machine gave him a $10 credit for every $1 he put in.
Wordy responses are my wont, but this time: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Intent (Score:4, Insightful)
Any average joe could do that.
Machines not designed for US currency??? (Score:5, Insightful)
If Caesars was so negligent that they put out machines not designed for US currency without testing them or having their vendor test them, then they deserve to lose the money.
We don't need no stinking testing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Applies to gas too? (Score:5, Insightful)
Entrapment? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
Countersuit (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't. When I've walked through vegas casinos some of those games look pretty freagin complicated and I wouldn't think anything of it if I got $10 credits for $1, especially with all the stupid lights and bells going off all around me. I'd probably figure there was a ratio of "game dollars" to real dollars, or something like when you put a quarter in a video game and it says "1/3" credit (because the game costs 75 cents). Why not 1/4 credit for a quarter? I wouldn't think anything of it I'd just stick some money in and play the game for a bit, and consider myself lucky if I came out with more $$ than I started. Big deal.
Also consider the fact that this was, according to TFA, a foreign machine that did not recognize dollars (anyone actually believe that?). Well if that were really the case that they couldn't even get the currency right, then I'd expect a the on-screen instructions to be poorly translated at best. It might be showing the wrong currency symbol entirely. Who knows.
One thing's for sure though: if these casinos are dumb enough to start suing their customers or trying to put them in jail, it's not going to entice a whole lot of people to take a trip to vegas... look at how well that plan worked for the music industry.
Whoa, there... (Score:5, Insightful)
Casinos are the rare exception to simple rules like this: anyone caught playing by the rules and winning too much is prosecuted, hence the prohibition against car counting in blackjack, which is simply smart play. They give you sheets to keep track of roulette spins, and will let you make notes on dice throws all day long.
To put it in simpler terms: You cut the cake, your brother chooses which piece. If you're the one cutting the cake, don't get pissed if your brother chooses the bigger half.
--Yahoo-- is not suing anyone (Score:5, Insightful)
Harrison County, Indiana is the legal entity considering criminal charges against players, probably at the behest of Caesar's.
I find the summary wording to be at least misleading, if not defamatory.
Beyond that, from TFA, the machine was crediting ten dollars for every dollar inserted, not paying out with more wins. It was clearly, demonstrably, and obviously faulty. So the answer to the question "Would your average user be able to distinguish 'faulty software' from 'lucky'?" is yes. They knew damned well they were getting $10 worth of chances for every $1. It was as obvious as finding that someone had left their wallet at the machine and pocketing it.
What the heck is going on here editors? This summary is beyond shoddy.
--
Toro
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:5, Insightful)
What makes it so reasonable to believe that the 'error' was really by design is the level of micromanagement that goes on at a typical casino. First the state is involved with highly stringent verification and validation of all electronic games of chance. Then there is the level of observation that goes on - cameras all over the place watching everybody. Then there the actual people on the floor watching everything - keeping track of who wins and who loses, deciding who to comp with free drinks, free rooms, etc.
Given all that, the chance of a broken machine lasting very long on the floor is so small that it is entirely reasonable to expect that it would be the last thing someone might expect when faced with the described behaviour. This is certainly the first time I've ever heard of such an event, despite there being hundreds of thousands of such machines in use for decades now.
Re:I'm just surprised (Score:3, Insightful)
Go back and RTFA a little closer.
Step 1: Player inserts $1
Step 2: Machine indicates the player has ten bets (i.e. $10)
Step 3: Player cashes out and recieves $10
Step 4: Go to step 1 and repeat until the player gets paranoid about being caught.
You see, the process really didn't involve any gambling at all, except being caught.
Re:Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree. This was the one point that really stood out in the article to me.
As long as you are not breaking any rules of the game, not cheating, they should not be able to prosecute you. If a person was operating the machine per instructions, insert coin/token, pull handle/push button, no matter what they did, they cannot be held accountable for any crime. If you operate the machine as described, you have a chance of it giving you more money. You intend to try to increase your money on these machines, and if operating it by the rules, there is no crime.
This should be treated much like counting cards at blackjack. If you do it in your head with no mechanical help, you are playing within the rules, and you are not cheating. The casino (except in Atlantic city I think) can tell you they'd not like to take your action anymore, and can even throw you out and not let you gamble there any longer, but, you cannot be charged with a crime. If you play by the rules they give you, you cannot be held criminal.
Re:Cut and dry. (Score:1, Insightful)
First Time Deposit Bonus.
Frequent Player Points.
Real Dollars vs Play Dollars.
Casino's 10th Aniversary Celebration.
"This week only, there is a chance that you could win additional play credits when you use our new electronic play system."
Whatever other harebrained promo they may have thought up.
I agree with Kathryn Ford. (Score:5, Insightful)
So my question is this: Imagine that the machine was faulty in the other direction, that it was rigged to never come up with a win, no matter how long you played. Would the casinos go to similar lengths to contact their patrons after the fact and send them reimbursement checks? If not, then I say, screw 'em.
Re:--Yahoo-- is not suing anyone (Score:3, Insightful)
You put a coin into the machine, pull the handle, win and then cash out. Now, you have a bin full of $1 coins. How reasonable is it for you to be aware that you have 9 more coins than you should?
It gets even harder if you do a lot of pulls.
Re:--Yahoo-- is not suing anyone (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmm, would somebody with that level of intelligence play a slot machine in the first place?
Re:Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole point of the article is that, apparently, you can.
Re:Good grief (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Applies to gas too? (Score:3, Insightful)
Heck, I DON'T keep the wrong change if I catch the mistake, and if I catch it past the point when I can do something about it (or the quantity is minimal) I feel shitty for the rest of the day... I really don't see how you can do it again and again.
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:2, Insightful)
This is patently false.
And this is probably where the source of your confusion lies.
There is no difference. Each machine is designed to perform a certain function that involves money. In each case, one party is using the machine to conduct a transaction with another party. In each case, the machine is broken in such a way that heavily favors one party over the other, a way that is readily obvious to a reasonable person, and a way that the other party does not agree to. In each case, the first party (the one that is being favored) exploits the fact that the other party (the one that is being screwed) doesn't know that the machine is broken in order to continue their financial gain at the expense of the other party even though it is obvious that the other party wouldn't consent.
The exact nature of what the machines do is irrelevant. Whether it's an ATM, a slot machine, an arcade money changer, an automated car wash money collector, a pay phone... whatever. All that really matters legally, both civilly and criminally, is whether the machine was screwed up in such a way that a reasonable person would know it. I'm guessing that the answer to that is yes. I can't imagine getting $10 credit for $1 inserted and thinking, "Gee, that was unexpected, but it must be what they meant." In the end, it will probably be something a judge or jury decides.
Re:Good grief (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:1, Insightful)
And if you walk up to a slot machine, put in $100, pulled the arm and the machine spit out $1000, what do you do?
There are probably two kinds of players involved. Ones that were playing the slots and had no idea they were winning free money, and ones that were playing the software error for everything they could get. If you're going to accept the argument that it's a matter of "criminal intent" then you're going to have to prove that the people were the second kind, once you have proven that a crime was committed in the first place.
Re:Good grief (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
A business has to eat their mistakes (Score:3, Insightful)
The bottom line is that if a business entity makes a mistake, they have to eat it. If there's culpability on the part of the slot manufacturer for their faulty software, then its up to the casino to go after them to re-coup their loss.
Was it dishonest to exploit the machine knowingly? Absolutely. Did everyone know? probably not. How can you separate those who did from those who didn't? You can't. You cannot prove to a reasonable degree of certainty that any of these people *knew* they were exploiting the machine. No proof? No Criminal.
Any judgment you can make will be solely on the perception of someone as honest or dishonest -- that infamous and often untrustworthy "gut instinct", and even at that I would still maintain that there's no criminal act to be guilty of in the first place.
As the casino should know: Sometimes you lose. (Score:3, Insightful)
This happened because either somebody didn't do their job, or there was inadequate quality control.
Personally, I think the casino should eat it, I don't think this is, or should be considered a criminal act - If charges end up being filed and this goes in front of a judge I don't think it's on the players to prove they just thought they were lucky, I think the casino would have to prove they they KNEW they were taking advantage, (and even if they did, I still think it's on the casino).
AFAIAC the furthest something like this should be able to go is civil court and ONLY if they can prove a player who made money off this didn't return it when asked.
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:2, Insightful)
It's the casino's own fucking problem if their software isn't working.
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
When a machine breaks and the customer loses money, then the casino does not give that money back. It is only right that when a machine breaks and the customer actually gains money that they should not have to pay back the casino.
Either way, the casino won't likely lose money. They'll either get that money back from the customer, from the machine vendor, or from insurance.
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:4, Insightful)
This is just passing the buck. Clearly someone at the casino was negligent in not fully testing the machines (not even basically testing them, if my understanding of the defect is correct) before placing them on the floor. That is were the fault lies, not with the users.
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
What the people in question were doing was inserting money, skipping the playing part and then tendering the till so they would get the improper amount of change or payout without playing the game. This is similar to seeing one of those charity vending stations that consist of a box of candy and has a sign saying 5 cents, dropping a nickel in and taking more then one product. No matter how you look at it, it isn't someone "playing" a game and the software borked to their favor. It is someone seeing the machine was faulting by making incorrect change and then proceeded to make change all night long.
I say making change because in essence that's what was happening. They were inserting the money and then cashing out. This is much the same way you make change on the pop machines that take dollar bills.
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:5, Insightful)
ATMs are meant to be easy to use. Clear. Straight forward. Also, you know that when you ask for $40, you get $40 or an error (such as insufficient funds or the machine can't dispense money right now, etc.)
Slot machines look nothing like ATMs. They have flashing lights. They are intentionally confusing. It is unlikely that the user would even detect the kind of error described in the article in a slot machine. You are using the machine in the hope that you get more out of it than you put in.
When I refill my Metro card (NYC subway) I have the option to get more credit than I am actually paying for. For example, if you put in $20, it will give you $24 worth of credit. This is a bonus for spending more at once. I would have a hard time not thinking that the casino was doing something analogous.
I have a hard time having any sympathy for the casino in this situation. The amount of their loss was tiny. People play games at a casino to win money. With this case, if you do somehow, against the odds, manage to win money, the casino can just ask for it back claiming there was an error.
So, it takes away any incentive to gamble. Which is OK with me, because I don't gamble and I think gambling ought to be illegal, period.
Re:Good grief (Score:4, Insightful)
If you run a casino, you deserve far worse. Being shot up with crack and watching your new addiction ruin your life would be about right. Merely losing some money from the same scheme you try on others... justice.
Re:Good grief (Score:2, Insightful)
In my opinion, getting fired was the least you deserved. Unfortunately, it appears that you blame the rules and not yourself.
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
The excuse usually doesn't make it right. In very rare situation will this happen. Especially when talking about legal infractions. But what it does do is make more people attempt to do that something. So it goes from ripping off casinos, to ripping off you because they don't agree with something about you (you have more then them, your an ass, you name it, others will come up with their own excuse that very simular to yours).
Something you said still doesn't make sense, This isn't the same scheme. One is playing the odds of a game of chance. The other is taking advantage of a discovered flaw and skipping the playing of the game. The only thing that has a game close to the situation is the location and association of the machine. They aren't playing a game of chance or anything close to that aspect when this happened.
Re: like the ballot boxes, right? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is far easier to cheat a voting machine than a slot machine, which demonstrates the sorry priorities of our current society.
Re:Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
Put a dollar into a penny slot and you'll get 100 credits for every dollar. Put a dollar into a nickel slot and you'll get 20 credits. A slot player may or may not notice the discrepancy between the dollars they put in and the amount of credits they receive. And even if those players do notice the discrepancy, they may attribute that to the signage on the machine being incorrect, thinking that the dollar machine really is a dime machine.
If players actually knew about this malfunction, you would see customers walking away with million dollar checks. The casinos would or should have been tipped off that something was wrong far earlier in those circumstances.
Don't attribute to maliciousness what you can attribute to stupidity.
If you can justify borderline illegal and illegal activity for any reason you will end up with lots of people breaking the law.
You're assuming that these players have done something illegal or "borderline" illegal, whatever that means. The last time I checked, unless an action is specifically deemed illegal, then it is perfectly legal to perform that action.
The fact is that the machine manufacturer produced these machines, the state and feds authorized these machines, the casinos willingly put these machines online for play, customers payed money to play them, and the machines payed out. Yes, there may have been a malfunction and malfunctions void all pays and plays, however the casino did not catch that malfunction, started the machine, and took player money for some time with those malfunctioning machines.
Hunting down innocent players after weeks or months went by, telling them that their slot machine was malfunctioning, telling them that they were not entitled to the money they won, and then demanding that money back sounds more like the real thievery going on. In fact, it sounds very similar to extortion. If the machine was malfunctioning, it should have been turned off and it should not have accepted that money in the first place. The casino, the state, the feds, or the machine manufacturer put this malfunctioning machine into play without properly checking it and thus one of those entities are financially responsible for that machine, not the players.
The fault here lies with sloppy auditing or maintenance, which is not the player's fault.
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
Atheists are usually less hung up on the whole "a rule is a rule" mentality, and more inclined to actually weigh the actual effects of an action.
I understand that gambling is a whole different world, and that there might be some pretty severe repercussions for the casino if a customer decided to make an issue of it. So maybe that makes firing a justifiable option for the casino (though, I think simply deducting 400 quarters from his paycheck would be ample disincentive for most people).
But apparently, that's not the issue for you. For you, the issue is OMG TEH FUXXOR IS 5T333L1NG!!1 and it wouldn't matter if the guy was working the floor of a casino or the neighborhood grocery store. Sure, the only thing he knew for absolute certain was that the quarter wasn't his. But we've got some pretty strong social customs regarding small quantities of loose change. These customs effectively say, "It belonged to somebody else at some point in the past, but it's unlikely that the original owner noticed the loss, that he'll be significantly harmed by it, or that he'll be back for it. So the legal principle of 'finders keepers' applies."
If nothing else, the whole phenomenon of the "take a penny, leave a penny" trays should be ample proof that people generally don't care. It would take a strange mind to turn an unclaimed quarter into a moral outrage.
Re:Good grief (Score:3, Insightful)
Further, you're assuming that customers, most of whom are senior citizens, can determine the difference between a malfunctioning machine and a correctly operating machine. Also, you're assuming that those customers can determine that difference better than casino maintenance or the machine manufacturer who put that machine into play. Unless each of those customers were walking out with million dollar checks, it's likely they never knew they played a malfunctioning machine.
Either way, the casino has controls in place to determine whether they're losing money on a certain machine or not getting enough money from a machine. Their auditing should have caught this mistake almost immediately, after their maintenance mistakenly put the malfunctioning machine into play. The mistakes here do not lie with the player.
The player is not responsible for the mistakes of the casino, the state, the feds, or the machine manufacturer.