Slashdot Mirror


Slot Machine with Bad Software Sends Players To Jail

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'?"

1 of 647 comments (clear)

  1. Bad move from the casino by ElGanzoLoco · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The Slashdot blurb is not very accurate. Makes it sound like the gamblers wouldn't notice the fault. Instead, the machine credited the players $10 each time $1 was inserted, according TFA. So the gamblers can't claim they didn't know the machine was faulty.

    Still, I think it's the responsibility of the casino to ensure the machines are working correctly. This is just like having an ATM spewing $100 bills at random, and expecting people to not take the money.

    I also think the casino is also doing a very bad, very dumb move by publicizing the issue. They lost close to 500,000 (small change for a casino) and want it back. But now the press is all over how Caesars Indiana is considering suing its patrons because their own machines failed - definetely high potential for PR damage.

    (Once, I put 1.5 euros in an automatic vending machine. The machine gave me my coffee, and returned 2 euros, which I obviously kept. Should the owner of the machine sue me?)

    --
    Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!