The interesting "touch" would be, kind of like at amusement parks or places like Dave and Busters, where you get "coupons" for winning "skill games" and can "redeem them for prizes" — generally, in those situations though, you cannot redeem for cash. But here, you aren't, you're exchanging for L$ which Linden says has 'no cash value'.

Problem is, if that was the case in the past, then previous forms of gambling wouldn't have been declared "illegal" either.

Really all they're doing is adding another layer of obfuscation, and then a 'skill' element, which, who knows. May be enough for Linden Lab to feel safe and look the other way.

https://support.secondlife.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=4417

Relevant paragraph: "The term "wagering" applies to any covered game or activity (i.e. game of chance, sports betting) in which a user contributes Linden dollars (or real-world money or things of value), whether into a pot, at a table game, at a house game, for purchase of a card (such as Bingo), or in any way risks Linden dollars based on whether an event may or may not occur, such as whether a team will win a sporting event, or whether Barack Obama will win the Democratic primary."

Note the following words in that paragraph: "or things of value".

Z$ is a thing of value. Its a thing you purchase with L$ and that can later translate back to L$. And L$ has been confirmed to have USD value, no matter what LL's stance is on the matter.

As far as I can see, the whole business about Z$ really is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Z$ has clear and direct L$ value. The ads may claim otherwise, the creators may also claim otherwise, but in the end its the behavior of the masses and reality of the matter is what makes things what they are: You purchase Z$ to gamble and then earn (or lose) other Z$ in order to later translate them into L$. Which is exactly what deal was with L$, when the CC companies complained.

So no. Putting a second mask (Z$) over your first mask (L$) and claiming you're not "real currency" isnt going to work. The rule is being broken, and LL is pulling the same thing they pull with DMCA's: They're looking into just how long they can get away with it without being pounced on by an army of lawyers.

I'm not really into banning gambling or care too much about it - mostly because its a field that I try to personally avoid, but I do feel very uncomfortable with LL's repeating pattern of vague behavior when it comes to legality: Either ban something or dont. Make up your minds already.

The first important thing to note here is that the casino games are IDENTICAL to the exact same games that were around before the ban, and were removed by the ban. They are the same, the only difference is that the wager is with Z$ instead of lindens.

After you're done playing, you play a "skill game" to cash out. Your balance of Z$ is used to recoup costs in this game and the "skill game" is a simple matching game with a time limit that is so absurdly generous that you would have to be developmentally challenged to lose it, and then one would need to question how you're able to get around in SL to begin with. There is no penalty if you lose, and you can continue playing the skill game repeatedly until you get tired of it.

Someone from SLU did this, purchased 500 Z$ and ended up making a profit (in lindens) on his first ten minutes through.

This is gambling, and they are manipulating semantics to try and get around it. Worse still they are claiming they have Linden approval to do this.

The whole system is a con, a shell game.

And The Governance team fell for it.

I've been in contact with Robin, Zara, Teagan, Michael, Kaylee and others. I know them and their public statements and professional behavior. I know many things about my Linden friends that command my respect. Your comments about them are rude, crude and insulting. You both have have portrayed them as fools. I take a lot of flak from idiots for all I do in SL, and I can shrug off attacks against me. But I take violent offense at the both of you, who have come off as pure fools by giving novice opinion against those who talked to legal counsel... and long before you created your vitriolic spew.

/me idly contemplates asking how much time either Colette or Joshua has spent in a law library versus my own time and decides that's a waste of effort.

Gambling in SL was hated by many while it was first still around. Because it attracts seedy people, as does anything that appears to be a path to easy money. Landowners who abuse resources, lagging out sims and locking out other landowners with legions of camping bots. The stories of people being forced out of their land by casinos popping up next door are too numerous to mention.

Secondly, there is the spam. Since the "return" of gambling, there is spam everywhee. Notecards randomly sent out to thousands of people. Group IM spam adfvertising "gaming" sites. Forum spamming, landmark givers dropped in sandboxes, etc. Many people in this industry clearly have a lack of conscience in how they advertise.

And thirdly, there is the scamming. No law enforcement, no government oversight. You can easily have a slot machine advertise it's high odds of payout, while simply taking money and never paying anything. Linden lab does not have the time, manpower, or inclination to inspect and approve all scripts in gambling machines and prevent scamming. So scams, there will always be. Wherever there is money to be made, there is always, ALWAYS someone willing to lie, cheat, and steal to get it. And screw anyone who gets hurt in the process.

Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see that these operations are full gambling, plain as day, no matter how many loopholes and abstraction layers you obfuscate the process with.

Linden lab are perfectly capable of explaining their decisions in a professional manner. What's unprofessional is allowing YOU to carry on with these claims of "linden friends" and approval.And apparently tolerating you to be some kind of unofficial voice.

This jira issue is a request for information. Because Linden Lab is apparently ignoring their own policies. What is especially suspicious is that Michael Linden, and several others, have said in the past, that Linden Lab does NOT approve or endorse any content, The advertising for these systems claims they are doing exactly that.

This is not a question just of Linden counsel's opinion--remember, counsel works for LL, not the other way around. So if there's a change of policy, it would be prudent of LL to announce exactly what it is, because whatever legal interpretation is operative at the moment, the subject games clearly violate the policy as previously stated.

Without some clarification, it's little wonder that FIC conspiracy theories circulate about "insider information" (see, e.g., http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?t=277244).

As if that all weren't problem enough, now that a notorious adfarmer is running his own "new rules" casino, the appearance that G-Team is only enforcing ARs by (not against) adfarmers feeds into the same shady old-boys-network paranoia.

A little transparency is necessary, however unpalatable the lawyers may find it to volunteer any information.

People worked hard on making these new systems & they were told by someone at Linden Labs they were ok. Maybe some of the game creators didn't get an approval for their new systems. If not there needs to be a game committee at Linden Labs game designers can submit their game too for approval.

It can not go on that one day a game is ok & then the next day after people spent thousands & thousands of L$ buying these games. Linden Labs has said in their past they can't & won't make these decisions on games it would take too long.

Linden Labs I ask you why not???? There are game creators willing to work with you tro make sure their game is ok for the laws of Second Life. If a game is approved by Linden Labs it should have some type of approval seal on it. So if you right click look at the game properties you can find a Linden Labs game approval seal. This would show others what games are approved by Linden Labs.

Linden Labs spent time on finding people help build them these roads on the grid. Its time to make some kind of games approval dept. And we ask that we will be told what games are approved. We need to know we are using a game thats 100% legal on Second Life.

ThaBiGG and others,.I think one major problem is that the minute that LL starts regulating content they lose any number of protections afforded to them by various laws, most notably the dmca which they lose when they start taking editorial control of content and because of that they can only make broad policies and not specifically endorse or dis-endorse (don't ask me how summary removal still leaves them ok) products. As it is between their various policies (ageplay, gambling) and their marketplace I'd bet, again I'm not a lawyer) that a good cause could be made that they've already lost those protections.

Whilst my interests may (and are almost certainly) not the same as many casino and other gambling establishment owners in SL, I believe that we all have an interest in clarification of this issue - on their part, to determine what they can actually do without facing summary removal of items, and on my part, what is considered "allowed" so that I might express opinions on anything which I feel might harm either the social structure of the grid or LL itself. Vagueness is never a legal defence.

I hear, incidentally, through "scuttlebutt" that there are clamping-downs on this sort of system planned for tomorrow. If true, this would really not be a good way of passing on the information.