Giant Vegas vs RTG

[Casinomeister]

I'm posting this here since this document is public record. If you had problems when Giant Vegas and Kiss Casino switched over to Playtech, now you know.

Incidentally, the same thing happened to the Black Widow group when they switched over too.

If these allegations are true, RTG is not looking too good.

[dominique]

Not very nice, is it.

Reminds me of what UB just did to Pokershare.

[Simmo!]

If the allegations are upheld, RTG have some serious issues on their hands. Incidentally, we shouldn't jump to any conclusions as we haven't seen the licence agreement so data and licence ownership issues may not necessarily be that clearcut.

Also interesting to see a legal document refer to "spammers" without any term of constitution. That in itself could string the case out while they prove what defines a "spammer" in legal terms

[eek]

From a scan through the document RTG licensees seem to be nothing more than affiliates, like with the Gambling Federation sites.

Okay so you can customise more things for your interface and offer bonus stuff but at the end of the day you're just a superaffiliate and RTG can pull the plug on you whenever they like, as has been demonstrated here.

Contrast this with the amount of player problems at different RTG licensees over the years that were totally ignored by RTG or where they just shrugged their shoulders and said there was nothing they could do....

[Casinomeister]

If the allegations are upheld, RTG have some serious issues on their hands...

I have a feeling this will only get a lot worse.

And if this turns out to be 100% true. RTG will have bad, bad problems on their hands. There are a couple of big RTG companies that won't like this a single bit.

[suzecat]

If the allegations are upheld, RTG have some serious issues on their hands. Incidentally, we shouldn't jump to any conclusions as we haven't seen the licence agreement so data and licence ownership issues may not necessarily be that clearcut.

Also interesting to see a legal document refer to "spammers" without any term of constitution. That in itself could string the case out while they prove what defines a "spammer" in legal terms

Thank you Simmo for the voice of reason. Add to that the fact that a bank (Neteller) is involved and the very strict standards they must follow.

The lawsuit has been filed in the US, thus giving the US courts jurisdiction over the matter. As far as the definition of "spammer," that is covered by the CAN-Spam act, a US law.

Let's give the "Devil's advocate" his due and suppose that the casinos involved simply wanted out of their agreements with RTG and suppose RTG did not want that to happen. Clever attorneys were then hired to find a "loophole" in the agreements and the instant lawsuit followed.

One thing is clear........the unfolding of both sides of this story should prove fascinating. I noticed the suit was filed in September.....has anyone seen the reply filed by RTG?

[vedat]

as i think all companys and people are innocent until its proven there are very sirious blames on RTG but as i think most of them should be false there are none other casinos other than giantvegas and kiss have problem with rtg that we heard maybe blackwidow group (and we all know how good they are at screwing ppl ) as kiss has changed 3 softwares at bossmedia they couldnt screw any players becouse of webdollar and then they switched to RTG at rtg they offered good bonuses and had problems with payments so they refuse to pay most of customers then y montana overseas force them to pay the problem occured there i think and they switched to playtech and i didnt hear anything good for them (alll the things i wrote is my toughts )

[jetset]

Interesting to have a different perspective here on this case, although I think the idea of a licensee going to all the trouble, risk and expense of this sort of litigation just to get out of a license agreement is a bit of a stretch.

And from my reading of the document it looks as if this all hit the fan right at the end of the Giant Vegas/Kiss agreement with RTG. But the point about the spammer definition in the Can-Spam Act is well made.

I doubt we'll hear too much more from these parties until this gets to court (or is perhaps settled out of court attended by an NDA) because the respective lawyers will now be manouevring and will not want to give too many of their tactics away. Maybe a denial from RTG because this will attract a lot of bad press I think.

If there isn't a settlement, the case is going to be a ripper. I didn't see any trial date listed, so perhaps RTG is still busy trying to digest this before deciding how to play it.

The punitive, compensatory and other costs Interbet intends to claim are not listed either unless I missed that - I imagine they will be substantial.

[gmblpdam]

What effect could this have on other RTG casinos that are not involved in this? Other than bad press for their software provider.

[jetset]

I imagine that if these allegations are proved it will be a concern for any RTG operator that their software and services provider is prepared to do this sort of thing.

That's going to demand some damage control imo. And perhaps some licensees will be considering a more stand-alone infrastructure such as Bodog and other big guys.

There will also be great concern over the player privacy issues this raises, which I think are probably the most serious concern in an ethical as well as business sense.