Video Poker Firmware Bug Yields Big Money, Federal Charges

JoeyRox writes "Over the course of playing $12 million worth of video poker, Las Vegas resident John Kane stumbled onto a firmware bug in IGT's 'Game King' machines that allowed him to cash out for 10x the amount of his winnings. John and his friends took advantage of the vulnerability to the tune of $429,945. John's friend was arrested by U.S. marshals and charged with violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but a federal magistrate ruled that the law doesn't apply and recommended dismissal. The case is currently being argued in a U.S. District Court."

Comments

Fraud is fraud

[i kan reed]

If you knowingly trick a computer into giving you money that's not yours, it's not any different than tricking a person into the same. Open door fallacies are the worst.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[K. S. Kyosuke]

The machine is programmed to behave in a certain way. If you handle it in some way, it will give you more money. I'd blame the vendor. Do you blame the customer who goes to the shop where they often overpay him in change for fraud?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[AuMatar]

But that's not the right law to charge him under. Charge him under fraud or stealing, no problem. This is the anti-hacking law- they're charging him with hacking. I don't think this qualifies. It also is the difference between being tried in the federal court system (hacking is a federal crime) vs the state (which owns the laws for theft and fraud).

Either way he should be prosecuted, the question is why and where.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gl4ss]

I thought having buggy game machine fw's was a federal offence?
now, do you think he should have been able to keep the money from the first time he pressed the buttons? perhaps the second too, how could he know wtf is really going inside the machine?

at the very least the computer fraud act shouldn't apply to a device that's supposed to just be a device and from his viewpoint it had no difference if it was a mechanical gambling machine or a computer.

bear in mind that in order to get ANY money out of a video poker you have to apply "skill" as well. that is pressing the right buttons at the right time. is it a trick to press the right buttons? "Kane’s attorney, Andrew Leavitt, says Kane played by the rules imposed by the machine, and that’s all that matters."

Re:Fraud is fraud

[cayenne8]

I don't think he should be prosecuted.

They have a machine...he didn't sigh any EULA or agreements about how to use it.

The main use of this machine is you put money into it, you hit buttons, it sometimes pays out.

He found a combination of buttons that causes it to pay out a LOT.

I see no problem with what he did. He simply put money in and pushed buttons on machine set out in public for the purpose of people pushing buttons and sometimes getting money out of it.

Show where he violated the signed terms of use or NDA or other type contract on exactly HOW he was to use the machine, and maybe you have a case.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

Fraud is committing an act of deception; how did they deceive the computer? Did they use false credentials or something? No - he just re-pressed the cash-out button. That's not fraud, that's a firmware programmer found dead in a ditch. And to address anonymous's concerns - that doesn't make it ethical, it simply makes it not fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

There was a case like this in the UK a few years ago. A family discovered that a particular cash machine was systematically giving out double the amount you had withdrawn. They repeatedly withdrew money using this machine. They were reported, and convicted of fraud. I doubt it would have happened with one-off visitors. If you ONCE visit a cash machine that gives you £200 and deducts from your account the £100 you intended to withdraw, then you've got lucky: you can't have known it would do that. But repeatedly visiting a machine that is misprogrammed to act in your favour, when you know that that is not how it is intended to function, is something quite different. That clearly amounts to fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Jeremy Erwin]

He got lucky. Gaming should reward luck.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Minwee]

Exactly. For example if I am playing poker and have a lousy hand, but bid high to trick the other players into folding, then that's fraud too. If I use that trick to make money then I'm stealing from the house.

Right?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

How is it fraud? If you tell a machine you want $20 and it gives you $40 (even if you do it repeatedly), you haven't committed an act of deception. I'm not saying it's right or ethical, I'm saying it's not fraud, and it certainly shouldn't be prosecuted that way. Theft by taking, maybe.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[i kan reed]

If you go up to a an elderly customer who's suffering from Alzheimer's and ask them to pay their bill several times, that's fraud. The user knew their actions weren't acceptable. I knew when I posted I'd get a million people giving me the damn open door fallacy. I even tried to head it off in my comment.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

The main use of this machine is you put money into it, you hit buttons, it sometimes pays out. He found a combination of buttons that causes it to pay out a LOT.

That's not exactly what he did. He found a combination of buttons that caused it to think he put in 10x the money he really did. Bad faith for sure. Illegal? We'll find out.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[i kan reed]

Did I say I was in favor of that stupid law? No. I didn't. What I said is that fraud is what has taken place here.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[i kan reed]

Programmed != clearly intended design.

Bugs should be fixed, yes, but that doesn't excuse exploiting them.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

I'm not justifying the actions of the guy, just saying it's not fraud - he didn't deceive anybody; your analogy doesn't work because there was nothing wrong with the computer the way there is something wrong with someone with Alzheimer's - the analogy would be like asking a perfectly "normal" person to pay their bills several times. I'm not justifying it, I've got nothing against gaming companies or casinos, and I'm not saying it wasn't illegal (I would consider it theft by taking); I'm just saying it's not fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[O'Nazareth]

[...] it's not any different than tricking a person into the same.

Is not it what casinos do?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

No, because in poker you don't play against the house. In fact, by making the bluff with a huge bet, you're padding the house's take (they take a percentage of the pot - the house NEVER loses in poker).

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, which happens to be a real problem in the baking industry. I asked for a dozen rolls and got 13. I sensed the baker was trying to make me inadvertently steal, so I threw the last one back at him and called him names. Learn to count.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

Even better--what if the machine was buggy the other way, in the casino's favor? If the bug was not obvious to the player, and it was found by a developer or casino employee, do you think it'd be fixed? My guess is probably not. So in cases like this, I think allowing the players to keep the money balances things out.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[ewieling]

Card Counting is legal in the USA. I imagine other forms of "brain only" ways to "cheat" the casino are also legal. http://voices.yahoo.com/is-card-counting-really-illegal-las-vegas-3566727.html

Re:Fraud is fraud

[rickb928]

Try tricking the person cross the table from you into giving you more chips than are in the pot.

If you can, that's a skill. If not, well, that's your problem.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Antipater]

Video Poker is very different from the game your friends play. There are no other individuals to play against, only a computer screen.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[RoknrolZombie]

Video Poker != Poker

Mainly because you're not playing against other players, you're playing against the house who defines the rules (the Gaming Commission is involved enough to make sure that there's a fair chance of winning, but "fair" does not imply "fair to the players").

Re:Fraud is fraud

[MozeeToby]

If you go shopping and the cashier messes up and fails to properly scan one of your products and you notice but stay silent is that theft? You are walking out of the store with products that you know you haven't paid for so IMO yes. And I don't see this as significantly different just because it is a machine that is being taken advantage of rather than a person. Computer fraud and hacking? Don't be ridiculous. But I feel he could and should be charged with plain and simple theft. Incidentally, growing up I was always taught to watch the register as my purchases were being rung up to make sure it was accurate. So far that's cost me a free Skil-Saw, a free video game, and a free digital camera and saved me maybe $10 in random overcharges during the same time frame.

Here's another thought experiment for everyone that claims this behavior isn't illegal. Imagine you go into a 7-11 and notice that the cashier is blind and has accidentally put his $20s where his $1s should be in the register. Is it illegal for me to find buy a $0.50 pack of gum with a $5 bill, knowing he'll give me $80 in change? How about if I come back and do it again and again and again? How does that situation significantly differ from what these guys were doing with the video poker machine?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BitZtream]

You blame the customer who throws a skeleton key (concrete brick) through the window and takes shit without paying ... and you're arguing that you don't do anything to the customer because he should have known the customer could throw a brick so its the vendor's fault.

The rules of the game are clear. Malfunction voids all games. That works BOTH directions. That means neither side whens in the case of an error in the machine. You agreed to that by playing.

Its not like these are rules for posted are not well known in advance, they are clearly written EVERYWHERE in vegas.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

Intent.... Ahhhhh, the dangling "what-we-think-about-you" rule system.....

Intent means you're guilty if you are a black biker gang leather wearing thug looking kinda guy even if you have a heart of gold.

It means if you are a white married mom with young babies then you were totally alright..... if your kids are cute and you dress nice and clean.

If you have a skin disorder that gives you a zitty pimply face.... then you're probably also guilty.....

If you're all full of yourself yet completely innocent under the regular interpretation of Intent, you'll still be guilty because you are full of yourself and need to be punished.....

Intent is BULLSHIT and means nothing. You can't crack brains to see what they thought.... Anything less is favoritism by association (old: good, young: bad, etc)

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

Why is this a response to my post? I didn't say it was ethical (or even legal), I said it wasn't "fraud." Even the article mentions the case calling it fraud was thrown out, but there are other laws that may have been violated. It's just not fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BitZtream]

If you believe in physics as the ruler of our universe, then everyone has the same odds, so even though randomness is a factor, it won't effect the outcome of a poker players career, though it may effect the outcome of a single game.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[j00r0m4nc3r]

Well, they're just mitigating bad luck with shrewd long-game play. It's still a game of luck if you look at it per-hand, but there are betting strategies and other skills involved if you intend to play the long-game, at which point I guess it becomes a game of skill.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[RoknrolZombie]

This is why the Gaming Commission is required to test/inspect the machines (to include deposits and payouts) on a regular basis. Until you have evidence that this is happening you're just trying to justify theft.

If the machine were found to be faulty, the individual would have their provable losses returned to them, probably up to a few hundred dollars. The casinos in Vegas are smart enough to recognize that it would cost them more to go to court and would be more than happy to return their money (money that, if the customer is happy, is probably going to be given back to the casino within a few hours anyway).

Re:Fraud is fraud

[organgtool]

Your example of bluffing is NOT fraud because you are fooling humans. It's alright to fool humans, but you had better not fool a machine! This guy fooled a machine to get more money than he deserved and the fault lies solely with him - not with the negligent developers of the firmware, not with the negligent testers of the machines, and not with the casinos who put them out on their floor. We can't expect people to do their jobs or to pay for the consequences of their own mistakes.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Sancho]

Do you blame the hacker who constructs the packet which causes the machine to operate in a way that it wasn't designed (deleting the database, giving higher level access than desired, etc?)

Re:Fraud is fraud

[rickb928]

IIRC, in Vegas gaming machine makers are required to write code that doesn't overtly cheat the gambler. As in, if the jackpot reaches astronomical size, the machine doesn't change the odds UNLESS that is the game, and everyone knows it. Which for video slots is not the game. the odds are supposed to stay the
same.

Haven't there been some court cases over whether software bugs could be used to recover unexpected winnings, after the gaming commission certified that the software was fair?

Oh. This, and an example of the casino, saying 'sorry, mistake, no jackpot for you'. the comments for this story include references to some classic 'outs', like disclaimers etc.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[RoknrolZombie]

Technically you're probably right, however I know that Casinos in Vegas do actually keep photographs and blacklists - if someone is in their books as being a "cheater" (to include card counting), the Casino is well within it's right to escort them from the premises. I have no idea how other places handle it (Atlantic City or Native Casinos), but in Vegas you generally don't get away with cheating for very long (both card counting and this exploit would be considered cheating by the casinos)

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

This happens all of the time with ATM's in the US. It never makes it to court.

When the bank loads an ATM cassette, they know exactly how much money is in it and what denomination of bills it contains. The serial number of the cassette is recorded by the person loading the ATM as well as by the ATM itself, by way of an RFID chip in the cassette. This links back to a database of ATM cassettes and their current load status and contents. The bank knows exactly, down to the serial numbers on the bills, what is in that cassette. Modern ATM's even automate the configuration from that database. The problem is that older ATM's don't.

When you go to an ATM and ask it for $40 (common "fast cash" amount these days), and the ATM has been configured for $20 bills, it dispenses two bills. If it's configured for $10 bills, it dispenses 4 bills. In older ATM's, the configuration is done manually. If a $20 cassette is loaded but the ATM is configured for a $10 cassette, it dispenses the wrong number of bills. That $40 you ask for is 4 bills, but the bills are $20 now, and you get $80.

When this happens, the bank will discover it as soon as they change the ATM cassette. Then they will find EVERY transaction that ATM performed on the previous cassette and contact the account-holders, notifying them that due to an incorrect ATM configuration, they were given more than they requested, and that the account has been rectified to reflect the correct ATM payout. For this transaction, any overdraft fees are waived (by law), and the transaction is applied to the day that the correct is made, not to the day the ATM paid out incorrectly (again, by law).

That's when most people drag their sorry butts back to the bank to make an emergency deposit of some no-longer ill-gotten gains to shore up their account balance.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[AK Marc]

The laws are also different. In the US, if someone mistakenly "gives" you something (they intended to give you something, but made an error), the international standard of "finders keepers" applies. Outside the US, the act of giving can be "withdrawn" if the gifter finds they made an error and works in good faith to correct it, and if you take something offered outside reasonability, you should have know it was an error and not done it.

In the US, the "free" items at a checkout usually say "take one" because if they said "free" some jackass would walk in and take them all. Outside the US, you are more likely to see things with implied "within reason". So "free" stuff is much more common, and you are expected to not abuse it.

It's cultural and legal differences.

But for this case, he gambled real money and got real payoffs. The problem is if you get paid out more than the house rigged it, it's a crime. The only fraud is on the part of the casino.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Coren22]

If I use that trick to make money then I'm stealing from the house.

Generally poker is played against other players, you could try bluffing in video poker if you wanted, I just doubt it will have an effect.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[AK Marc]

If you knowingly trick a computer into giving you money that's not yours,

...It's called gambling.

He put money in a machine that was put there to pay out money at times. He got a payout at times. That the payout was not what was intended, he didn't "hack" the machine by changing it.

If you charge him with hacking, then you have to charge me with hacking the one time my chips were stuck in a vending machine and I shook it and out popped my chips (and a candy bar). And if I hadn't taken the candy for my trouble, the next person would have committed theft of my fraud, right?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BitZtream]

The LAW is clear.

Malfunction voids the game. That goes both directions. They MUST refund any money they can. They MUST report it to the gaming board, and the board will decide how to handle the situation further ... like deal with a situation where its been happening for too long to possibly find and refund money to all players. In the end, the casino will NOT get to keep the money and MAY get fined/sanctioned.

Casino's don't just do whatever suits them in this aspect, gambling is a tightly regulated industry in the US. While they can legally take your money for you being stupid and handing it too them, the states require them to be VERY precise. They can not mislead you even a little bit, even unintentionally.

They don't need to do anything sleezy believe it or not, people will be happy to throw money at them with everything out in the open and up front about it.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Technically you're probably right, however I know that Casinos in Vegas do actually keep photographs and blacklists - if someone is in their books as being a "cheater" (to include card counting), the Casino is well within it's right to escort them from the premises.

Well, that alone makes me side with the guy - if you advertise a game with some rules and then enforce a "but we'll only admit losers to the game" policy, you're already rigging it. Even if it were immoral per se for the guy to walk away with the money, I think that in the grand scheme of things, it would be only a tiny upwards adjustment of bad karma for the gaming industry.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[jittles]

I spent some time in the security room of an Indian casino and I've seen the book with my own eyes. The Indian casinos and Vegas casinos all share this information willingly. You end up in the book in Vegas and you can bet that every legal casino in the country is going to get your information in no time.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[unrtst]

Every time I've ever played those damn machines, they take all my money. I've managed a win here or there, but never came out on top, and whatever budget I set for myself was exhausted in short order. We're told that's how they're supposed to work; that the odds are in the houses favor; that walking away with more money than you start with is supposed to be a rare thing. These two guys pull that off, and they walk away with around $500k or so (each?), and they're the ones getting arrested? WTF?!? The casino's openly say they're just going to keep fleecing everyone, and we're all fine with that, but two guys get a couple bucks (by just pushing the buttons on the front that they're allowed to push) and they're evil?

The casinos should just fix the bug, or enable the work around, and move on. The first guy has played $12 MILLION in video poker prior to this. The house has made plenty to cover this relatively minor payout. Let these two guys be happy and tell all their friends how much they won, and put them on banners and billboards saying "look at these big winners!!!", and they'll get plenty more people flocking to the machines and losing it all.

I don't think they broken any of the mentioned laws, and the CFAA should be neutered, but none of that even matters. The casinos are already ahead of the game cash-wise; they've ID'd the bug; it's simple to disable the bug-causing feature; there's probably an update that fixes it; they're legally allowed to bar these guys from ever coming back (but why would they!?!!? he spent $12million on video poker alone before ever even discovering this bug); and last but not least, SHOULDN'T THEY BE SUING IGN (maker of the game)!?!?!

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BattleApple]

Instead of calling it a bug, I'd just call it an easter egg.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[LordLimecat]

If you tell a machine you want $20 and it gives you $40, you haven't committed an act of deception.

True.

(even if you do it repeatedly)

Theres "technically possible", and theres "fraud". Sometimes the two overlap.

Intentionally abusing a process in bad faith can be a crime, and should be a crime; society doesnt make rules based on whether something is "possible", just based on whether it should be allowed.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Charliemopps]

Everything about Casinos and Video Poker is fraud. Yet it's completely legal for them to operate facilities that pump oxygen into the air to keep you awake longer, provide you with free drinks so you'll make poor decisions, design slot machines to be as loud as possible when dropping coins/tokens to give the false impression of larger winnings. They are in the very business of defrauding people. Gambling IS fraud. Good for these guys to be on the winning side for once.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[AmiMoJo]

Under UK law it is fraud if you are aware of the mistake but take no action to alert the bank to it and instead enrich yourself.

In a similar vein sometimes people make mistakes doing bank to bank transfers. They mistype the account number and it ends up in the wrong person's account. If the recipient can be shown to have known that it was a mistake (an unexpected $1,000,000 appears on their balance) but decides to spend it then they can be convicted of fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[unrtst]

I would consider it theft by taking

How is it theft to take what the machine is handing you**, but it's not theft when the machine gladly takes your money?

I realize there's the whole "intent" thing, and knowing it's more than you're supposed to get, but you're dealing with a machine that, conversely, lacks that ability to understand in the other direction. If I accidentally push the $10 button instead of the $1 button, it'll gladly take my $10 and there's not shit that can be done about it. If it accidentally gives me 10x's the money it's supposed to.... turn about is fair play as far as I'm concerned.

What, am I supposed to believe that all those bells and chimes and lights and scantly clad waitresses and free drinks are there to help me make better decisions? They're there to entice people into forking over more money than they intended to part with. Two guys found a way to get one model of machines to fork over more than they wanted to, and it really wasn't *that* much (no where near what the casinos take in). So what.

** the payouts were so big, that people actually handed him the money. They could have stopped right there.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[RoknrolZombie]

If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. He was under no obligation to steal from anyone, but by playing the game he accepted their rules. Unfortunately (perhaps) we don't get to redefine other people's rules by what we judge to be "fair".

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

It's theft by taking because you're taking something you know is not rightfully yours.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[AmiMoJo]

I think the crux of it is that he knew the payout was a mistake. The machine said "you win $10" but spat out $100. He made it do that many, many times. It's not like discovering a way to win, it's like discovering a way to cheat.

I have a feeling I will be modded down because this runs contrary to Slashdot / Sheldon Cooper logic, but at least from a legal point of view there is a difference between winning a game of chance and enriching yourself as the result of a mistake you were aware of. And yes, in theory that means if they give you too much change at the checkout and you notice you are supposed to tell them, otherwise it's fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gfxguy]

Actually, I'm not pretending it's OK at all, I'm just saying there's no deception; no deception = no fraud.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[dgatwood]

Do you really want to live in a world where people have to have no respect for your wishes unless you get them to put their signature on paper? Do you want to end internet commerce as you know it? Do want all of the Internet to suddenly disappear because a whole bunch of shit suddenly becomes impractical to do because everyone spends a bunch of time waiting for the mailman to show up with signed documents?

Do you really want to live in a world where someone who, without modifying a device, without taking any steps that would ordinarily qualify as hacking/cracking, can be brought up on hacking charges? Frankly, even if he had signed a EULA, how are you going to prove that the person knew and remembered that the previous bet was 820:1 and not 8200:1? This is an error that could easily occur innocently. Admittedly, not several times in a row, but it could occur once innocently. And it seems likely that if one person found the problem, other people have been exploiting it for years. Based on that, the correct response is, "Thanks for exploiting the flaw in a way that made it so obvious that we could compel the manufacturer to correct it." In the long run, his actions likely saved the company money.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[iamhassi]

But that is a cash machine. This story is about a gambling machine, where you put money in and hope to win money back. If there is a trick that helps him win money back isn't that part of the game? It's not cheating, he didn't change the code, he was just using the code the way it was written. Seems to me someone could argue that anytime the machine loses the person could risk being accused of "cheating" and be arrested.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[nabsltd]

Video Poker is very different from the game your friends play. There are no other individuals to play against, only a computer screen.

Despite this, a video poker player with skill will do far better than one without.

The pay table on the machine will tell you if it is a good machine to play in the first place (skill required to know what is "good"), and then once you do play, knowing what to keep for the draw involves a lot of skill, which varies based on the exact pay table. With this sort of correct play, some video poker machines pay back over 100% in the long run.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BitZtream]

No.

Bluffing is a known aspect of the game of poker. Its actually part of the game. Everyone playing poker in a casino is fully aware of 'the bluff'.

What this guy did was took advantage of a software bug that caused UNINTENDED AND UNEXPECTED interactions between two DIFFERENT games that ran on the same machine. Its like if you played WoW for hours to get a loot box to drop ... then switched over to GTA V, and placed a super high bet in a gambling game in GTA V ... knowing that by doing so, you could switch back to WoW and have to multiple the loot in the drop by 10 times.

Its not supposed to work that way, and everyone knows it. Its not that he his following the 'letter of the law' when it comes to the rules, he's actually breaking the rules, using a flaw in the machine to do so.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[xswl0931]

Let's say this is a snack dispensing machine. You accidentally discover that if you bump the machine in a particular location, food drops without you putting any money in. You do this repeatedly. Has a crime occurred?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BitZtream]

Read the article.

He's exploiting the interaction between two different software modules to his advantage. While from a technical perspective he didn't write any assembly to exploit a buffer overflow, he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software. The software was not clearing out memory it reused for like purposes between two different games, by exploiting this, he was able to increase his winnings by 10x.

He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software. He just isn't using your typical UI to enter and run the hack but he really is exploiting a software bug like metasploit would, or any other attack vector.

This isn't your typical hacking applied to some object that just happens to have a processor. He is hacking the software, and more so, a specific version of the software with specific features enabled. This is no different than an attack targeted at Chrome or Safari, it just seems that way because the UI isn't a terminal window.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[nabsltd]

Malfunction voids the game.

The machines were working exactly as they were programmed to work.

The casinos may not like the fact that they paid out more money than they "should", but they were not malfunctioning. If it was a single unit instead of units all over the US, I'd agree you definitely could call it a "malfunction", but with every unit acting that way, the line is a lot harder to draw.

That goes both directions.

Actually, it doesn't, as only the casino gets to decide if it was a "malfunction". I've never heard any story about a machine that was paying out too little and the casino made it right.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Dynedain]

The real game in poker is not the cards dealt, that's pure luck. The game (and the skill) exists in betting strategies. Do you try to intimidate everyone else at the table, keep them guessing, hide or bluff your hand? Blackjack is a game where it's purely about the odds and your statement is true. Poker however has a very significant skill aspect to it. (whether you consider it a skill with any value is a different story)

Re: Fraud is fraud

[Kittenman]

Let's say this is a snack dispensing machine. You accidentally discover that if you bump the machine in a particular location, food drops without you putting any money in. You do this repeatedly. Has a crime occurred?

Conversely - I have put money into snack machines and had nothing come out. Has the machine defrauded me?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[BitZtream]

No.

Casino's are surprisingly honest, by law.

A casino makes money on slots because if it takes in $100, it only pays out $90. It doesn't have to cheat because the game is designed so that the house wins over time no matter what. They don't have to do anything out of the ordinary because in order for someone to get paid $100, they've taken in $110. More winnings means more money for them because the rules are designed in their favor, and these rules are up front and public, every game is required to tell you how it pays.

The problem is that this guy figured out that if he played a machine that had multiple games on it, and played game A until he was given the opportunity to double his bet, that he could exit the game, go play B (on the same machine) and in that one play for a higher dollar amount (win or lose doesn't matter) then he could switch back to game A ... where it didn't bother to notice he had left without finishing his last game ... and to not notice that it used the same shared memory location in both cames for the 'how much was bet' values ... so now, he played game A for $1 until it won, then he tricked it into thinking he had been playing for $10 and paying out based on that.

It was sloppying coding that allowed a software exploitable bug he used to cheat and not play by the agreed on rules.

Even the casino's play by the agreed on rules, they may be not so fair, but they are what everyone agrees to. They don't flat out lie to you, he was.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Jyms]

If you notice that a dealer is having a bad day (stressed, tired, angry with his boss) and overpaying players and you choose to sit down and play at that table, are you a criminal? I agree that you are unethical, but are you a criminal?
Alternatively, let's say you accidentally pushed this sequence of buttons and were overpaid, but did not know how it happened. What should you do?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Jyms]

Excellent point! I am by no means a frequent gambler, but on the odd occasion that I have been to a casino that is pretty much how it has worked for me. Put in money, push random buttons and hope for the best. I once won a fairly decent amount of money, but had absolutely no clue how the game worked (what the rules were) that I was playing.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[immaterial]

The owner of the money is under the impression that the machine is giving you the correct payout. You know this is not the case, but allow them to continue to believe that. That is deception, and fraud, whether you like it or not.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[mapsjanhere]

I thought he got lucky that he wound up with federal charges and not a visit from Guido and Raoul discussing the matter in a private setting. Vegas has changed in the last 50 years.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[immaterial]

That's false, actually. If you don't attempt to correct the error, you've deceived the owner of the machine/money, who thinks the machine is disbursing correct payments while you know it is not. This may be passive deception (ie. a "lie of omission"), but it is deception nonetheless.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[immaterial]

If it's set up to do that intentionally, of course it did (well more specifically whoever controls the machine did). If it was accidental (as is likely, given that mechanical dispensers aren't flawless) it's not fraud but they do still owe you the money back - just like if the gambling machine accidentally gives you too much money, it's not fraud if you report the error and return the extra cash.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[reve_etrange]

Whether or not it should be considered fraud on an ethical basis, for it to be prosecuted there should be a law against it. The government should not be able to invoke inapplicable laws just because whatever happened was "wrong."

Re:Fraud is fraud

[networkBoy]

And then you were charged with assault.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[triffid_98]

Sheldon: "For what it's worth, my mother says that when we deceive for personal gain, we make Jesus cry."

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Hatta]

he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software

And if I use my fingers and eyes to write a mental program that allows me to beat the house at blackjack(e.g. card counting), is that hacking too? No, it's strategy.

He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software.

Bullshit. He's playing the game as it is implemented. He found a strategy that allowed him to win more than the casino intended. The game might be unfairly balanced against the casino, but that's the casino's fault.

The technical details of how his strategy works doesn't change the fact that it's a strategy. And discovering winning strategies is the whole point of playing games.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gnasher719]

If you knowingly trick a computer into giving you money that's not yours, it's not any different than tricking a person into the same. Open door fallacies are the worst.

That would depend on what the law actually says. And I mean the exact wording. In the case of a gambling machine, you throw in money, you press buttons, and the machine may or may not spit out money, which you then keep. That's how it works. If the machine spits it out, it is yours.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[networkBoy]

I got a free plant.
I tried to tell the drone at the register that the plant did not ring up.
they said it did.
-meh.

At that point I don't think it's unethical.

But: if you say nothing, yes it's unethical, though not criminal. If you exploit it then it *should* be criminal.

I temper this with the following:
We are supposed to have judges to *JUDGE THE LAW* not the people (that's what juries are for). As long as judges blindly go with laws that are unjust, then folks should not be charged for violating the spirit, but not letter of the law. It should work *both* ways equally. /rant (sorry)

Re:Fraud is fraud

[networkBoy]

lulz
you made my day.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[networkBoy]

That dealer will be yanked *very* fast, non issue.
If you don't know how it happened, are you even sure you won wrongly?

I think *most* people would go *WWOOOOOOO I Won!* then promptly blow the money on something else.
-nb

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

If IGT found a bug in the code where their deck only used 51 cards, would they issue a refund to all the players? No? well then tough titties, fix the code.
I fully support the Casino suing the manufacture for defective equipment, but not the consumer.

" it's not any different than tricking a person into the same."
That's not the definition of fraud, so you might want to learn and think next time.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

Poker is luck and skill.
The longer you play, the less luck(random chance in or against you) has an impact.

That is true both with a specific games, and more so when you track many games, like professional poker.

IT's important to remember that becasue how you bet can be determine buy how often you play.

SO if you have a hand that wins 20% of the time, you might bet because you only need to win 1 out of 5 to break even.

NONE of the applies to video poker, it's mostly luck, the only skill is in not throwing out winning hands.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

You sound stupid.
Let me help you:
fraud: In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual;

There is no deception going on.

This isn't fraud just like if you owed me 20 dollar and gave me a 50 by mistake.

Ethically, should I tell you of your mistake? yes. Would I tell you? probably*. but it's not fraud.

*I say probably becasue one time I went into a 7-11 and the person was talking on the phone and turned her back to me.
Then when I took my six pack of soda to the counter, she ignored me while talking on the phone.
Then I cleared my throat and she looked at me with disgust, sighed, the with an attitude told me the price. I gave her a five, she gave me my changed, glared at me for a moment then turned her back. When I looked down she gave me change for a 20. after waiting a minute I just left with the money.

any other time I've gotten too much change I told whomever made the mistake.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

what am I a casino owner? video game machine expert? head of marketing? how should I know it's not some special promotion?

Don't make the consumer responsible for machine mistakes.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

"Intentionally abusing a process in bad faith can be a crime,"
no.

"and should be a crime"
never. If this is the case the consumer becomes responsible for every possible mistake. That is a path I don't want to travel.

Do you want a bill for a product you got charged the wrong price for? Do you want to be responsible for any possible mistake a store/corporation might do?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

wrong. The people who claimed it wouldn't make mistakes deceived the owner.

It's not a deception from the consumer by any definition.

Deception, beguilement, deceit, bluff, mystification and subterfuge are acts to propagate beliefs that are not true, or not the whole truth (as in half-truths or omission). Deception can involve dissimulation, propaganda, and sleight of hand, as well as distraction, camouflage, or concealment.

They didn't propagated a belief, they didn't tell a half truth.
Did they omit anything from anyone? If someone asked them what they were doing and the didn't tell the truth to that person, then it' s a deception to that person.

No deception, no fraud. Too bad So sad.

Plus, its a horrible business move to go after these people. the PR is bad.
Far better saying yeah, the machine had a bug, it's fix. I guess those guy were lucky!
Now people will come in and spend hundreds looking for a machine with a bug.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

No.
However its not the same thing. IT isn't a gambling machine.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

The charged him under the crime becasue what happened isn't really considered fraud or stealing.

"Either way he should be prosecuted, the question is why and where."
no he shouldn't. Thinking that is short sighted, and frankly, stupid.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

Vegas wasn't like the 50 years ago. try 70.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

NO, it's isn't that clear. Many casino will simply switch out the card and keep going. There is no refund.
You commit the logical fallacy "Ad Caps ignoratum.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

No, you are the asshole. Plus shortsighted and egotistical, so you are the complete tri-fuckta.

Yeah. lets make people completely responsible for software errors. That way when you are charged the wrong price, you can be billed the next time the store does their books.
Oh, sales tax calculated wrong? well you better be ready to pay the difference to the store.

Hey, last time you pumped gas, there was an error and we charged yo for one less gallon, pay up now!

On and on.

"You haven't made me sign a document stating that I won't kill you while you sleep"
and there it is; a completely incorrect absurd example that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. You have no valid point, you lose.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

It could have been free plant day for all you know. Why are you responsible for tracking every event, sale, and checkout the store does?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

"eyes to write a mental program"
that is the stupidest thing I have ever read in 12 years of slashdot.
I mean, completely moronic, stupid. I am sad that there is a human brain that would actual bring a thought that mind numbing stupid together.

holy crap, I mean, it's like you are trying to follow some "Buddha of stupid". SO stupid every time someone reads it the statement seems even more stupid then the last time they read it..

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

Some video poker machines have several AI players, and they institute bluffing strategies.

I don't know if the type in question is that type, but they do exist.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

"Casino's are surprisingly honest, by law."
which means they adhere to the law.
So? why do you think they don't make laws that work in their favor?
What, do you think laws that enforce specific payout are defeated by themselves?

you can't cheat a computer., you can only operate it within it's programmed bounds.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[geekoid]

"That dealer will be yanked *very* fast, non issue."
YO should probably work in a casino before opening you mouth about what goes on in a casino.

"If you don't know how it happened, are you even sure you won wrongly?"
because when you count you money you have 10x what you would expect.

"I think *most* people would go *WWOOOOOOO I Won!* "
no, the vast majority of people playing video poker know EXACTLY how much they one.

" then promptly blow the money on something else."
Yes.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[pla]

Malfunction voids all games. That works BOTH directions. That means neither side whens in the case of an error in the machine. You agreed to that by playing.

Yeah, sure - Try taking the casino to court for losing more than 51% of the time (or whatever the local gaming commission defines as the worst possible odds) over a statistically significant number of plays. Let me know how you do in that one.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[maglor_83]

The rules of the game are clear. Malfunction voids all games. That works BOTH directions. That means neither side whens in the case of an error in the machine.

So they will be refunding money to everyone who lost money on this machine?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Jeremy Erwin]

Oh, sorry. Casinos call themselves the "Gaming Industry" because "gambling" sounds antisocial.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[pla]

This is why the Gaming Commission is required to test/inspect the machines (to include deposits and payouts) on a regular basis. Until you have evidence that this is happening you're just trying to justify theft. If the machine were found to be faulty, the individual would have their provable losses returned to them, probably up to a few hundred dollars.

That sounds just peachy - Except that the machines in question had the exact same tests done to them, and still contained a bug that no one had caught for who knows how long.

It counts as pure hubris to claim that bugs in the opposite direction (opposed to the player) don't exist and remain uncaught.


That said, the definition of "fraud" here has a lot of flexibility. I recall a case from my youth (when I worked for a competitor of IGT, for whatever credibility that gives me) where someone cracked our RNG algorithm on a "pick 3" type game. After they had won a few hundred grand, the jurisdiction asked us to look into it, and we changed the RNG, the player stopped winning game after game after game. No charges ever followed, because it shouldn't count as fraud if you figure out how to win the fucking game, even though an entire state government lost a noticeable amount of money.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[CaroKann]

This guy was apparently obsessed with video poker. He played constantly and knew the game inside and out. Apparently he stumbled across a bug, and was able to repeat the necessary steps to reproduce it.

I think this is more like an obsessive video game player, who plays the game enough to learn every trick and secret. For example, say there is a particular game boss you wish to defeat. Play enough, and you learn the boss encounter by heart. You will know what the boss will do and when. You will learn where to stand, what abilities to use, how to cheese it, everything. Eventually, you will be able to beat in your sleep. Is that hacking?

To me, hacking would be modifying the software or machine or obtaining the source code to find exploits.

This is stealing, like taking advantage from a malfunctioning ATM machine to obtain lots of cash is stealing. If you take money from a malfunctioning ATM, is that hacking? It is not.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[jythie]

Yeah, but these are machines designed to defraud players. They actually have a setting in them for 'what percentage of profit should the house get' and over time give out that amount.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[daveime]

And this is why you are replying to posts on Slashdot, rather than doing drugs, booze and hookers on your private island in the Bahamas.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[LrdDimwit]

Yes, you have. If you look carefully, many vending machines (especially those run by vending machine companies renting space inside other businesses) will have a little placard on the side, instructing you to call some telephone number if you have any issues with the machine.

And it isn't a joke, either. You can call up that number, leave your name and address, and a couple weeks later you'll get a check in the mail for 75 cents (or what have you). Sure, nobody ever actually bothers to try to get a refund from a mis-vend, but that doesn't mean the option isn't there.

Also, the key difference? Vending machines are unlikely to remain change-eating black holes for long. People will complain vociferously and it will be resolved real fast. Nobody will complain they got free stuff.

A better analogy would be a vendor deliberately modifying their machines to occasionally take people's money without giving them anything, banking on the fact nobody ever demands their 75 cents back to make a profit. And you better believe that if you get caught doing that, you're going to jail.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[shentino]

Or just charge him with cheating.

Hell, it's even a felony in Nevada.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[shentino]

Why the hell not?

We wouldn't take it lying down if a software bug cheated US instead of the establishment, yes?

So why should we be self entitled pricks if the glitch happens to fall in our favor instead of against us?

You can't have it both ways.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[fustakrakich]

...he didn't sigh any EULA or agreements about how to use it...

Actually he may have when he opened his account. How many people read those contracts?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[kwbauer]

The Indian casinos are generally run by the Vegas casinos as are the New Jersey casinos.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Nyder]

If you knowingly trick a computer into giving you money that's not yours, it's not any different than tricking a person into the same. Open door fallacies are the worst.

They didn't trick it. They hit a combo of buttons, the machine was programmed (or not programmed) to respond to those button presses.

Tricking someone into giving you money implies that you are lying to the person to get the money. This person is not lying, he is not using any external device, he is just using the game like it was programmed.

The Vendor needs to be responsible for software bugs. They need to test it and find the bugs, or they can lose money.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Nyder]

There was a case like this in the UK a few years ago....

Let's be real here, the UK is hardly an example of good use of laws.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[SpaceLifeForm]

Well, they can't call themselves the "Gambling Industry", because they are not gambling at all, they know they will make a profit.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[SpaceLifeForm]

You are hell-bent on this story. You are also full of crap. There is no implicit contract involved here. There is no transaction. There are no goods or services being purchased that can be returned or be made good if there is a defect. To wit: I see a slot machine. It has a slot that accepts tokens, and in return for accepting that token, some wheels may rotate and some lights may flash, and noise, oh boy, plenty of noise I hear. I.E., it is a shiny object that provides entertainment if you find that rotating wheel, flashing lights, and noise is entertainment. Rumor has it, that said machine sometimes also regurgitates stuff that may have value, and one can pocket said regurgitation. I put a token into this shiny object that may regurgitate stuff. At this point, I have a decision to make. Do I really want to see this "entertainment". Let's say I do, because I am curious. Now, I have another decision to make. Do I pull the handle or do I press the button. Decision, decisions. Oh, wait, maybe I decide that I am not curious after all, and maybe I want to hit the payout button and get my token back. Man, this is all so fucking confusing. No wonder they call slots a skill game. Now, let's say I decide that I am going to push the button, and just as I do, I get distracted, and have to turn away. When I turn back to the shiny machine, there is no credit, no regurgitation to be found. Tell me, how do I know that the shiny machine did not malfunction?? I want my token back. Yeah, if I bitch enough and make a scene, the house will give me my token back, and also tell me to hit the road. But, how do I know the machine is working properly, as intended, as programmed? There is abolutely no way. And if the customer can NOT know that there is no malfunction, there can not be any implicit contract because there are no goods that could be returned or a service that can be corrected. But, you in the Gambling Industry don't really care, because there is a sucker born every minute.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Jherek Carnelian]

It is about balance of power and who makes the rules. Regular joes pretty much never make the rules, they just have to take what they are given. So when there is an error, the benefit of the doubt goes to the little guy, regardless of who the error favors.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[LordLimecat]

So are you a lawyer, or are you just hoping that your semantic argument will win the judge over?

Last I checked, intent plays a huge role in law; if you suspect that you are breaking the law, that can in some circumstances be enough-- whether or not you technically told a lie or decieved someone.

I wont say for sure that its illegal (not being a lawyer), but Im almost positive Ive heard of people being convicted for similar things. In general, if you think something might be illegal, its a really bad idea to do it.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[michelcolman]

Except for the fact that it's actually true. There are actual "professional" players, mainly retired or unemployed people, who sit in front of these machines all day and make a little bit of money in the long run. But way below minimum wage, so not really worth it. I'm not sure about the casino's strategy behind this, I guess it's to attract more non-perfect players who lose a lot more money than the "pros" are making. They basically use them for cheap advertising, I guess.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

The machine is programmed to behave in a certain way. If you handle it in some way, it will give you more money. I'd blame the vendor. Do you blame the customer who goes to the shop where they often overpay him in change for fraud?

Yes.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Everyone has equal odds of winning a given hand

No they don't.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

It would be theft by taking/finding if you did it once. If you keep doing it, it's something more serious.

If a bank accidentally miscalculated your mortgage interest payments once, that's one thing. If they systematically kept doing it over a period of years even though they knew the calculations were incorrect, well, what would you call it?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

You're missing the point. If you kept going back to that 7-11 when the same cashier was there, and you knew she consistently gave you too much change, that is no longer an innocent piece of luck. You are defrauding 7/11.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

You have the morals of a sociopath and the intellectual discrimination of a 13 year old.

I wish you luck in your career as a politician.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

There is no implicit contract involved here. There is no transaction. There are no goods or services being purchased that can be returned or be made good if there is a defect.

Nonsense. If you play the machine, you are entering into a contract with the owner which says you are prepared to gamble on the chance of winning some money.

Do you really think the owner can just fix the machine so that it never pays out?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Fuck your anglo-saxon religion. FUCK IT.

So in your wonderful religio-legal system, if I accidentally transfer my life savings to your account which is one digit different from my other savings account, that's fine and you can just keep it?

Well, fuck YOU, mate.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[L4t3r4lu5]

I agree that it's not fraud, but theft. You are stealing the bank's money, and doing it knowingly. That money is not yours, you know it isn't, and you continue to take.

Interesting side note; If money is accidentally deposited into the wrong account, even at your error, you are entitled to that money back. It is your money, and you intended to give it to a specific person. Nobody else can claim "Oh, he put it in my account, so it's mine." (In the UK, at least).

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

In the US, if someone mistakenly "gives" you something (they intended to give you something, but made an error), the international standard of "finders keepers" applies.

Seriously? If a bank made an error and credited your account with 100,000,000.00 instead of 100.00 (or something) you'd just be allowed to keep it? Are you sure?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

For a libertarian nonce, everything is about the fucking Gold Standard.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Let's say this is a snack dispensing machine. You accidentally discover that if you bump the machine in a particular location, food drops without you putting any money in. You do this repeatedly. Has a crime occurred?

Conversely - I have put money into snack machines and had nothing come out. Has the machine defrauded me?

If it did it regularly and you had no redress, then yes the snack machine company would be defrauding you.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

There was a case like this in the UK a few years ago....

Let's be real here, the UK is hardly an example of good use of laws.

You are aware that the US legal system is, in fact, based on the UK's?

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

The rules of the game are clear. Malfunction voids all games. That works BOTH directions. That means neither side whens in the case of an error in the machine.

So they will be refunding money to everyone who lost money on this machine?

No, it is part of the contract that you are prepared to lose money on a gambling machine. If the machine malfunctions, that is when the contract is voided.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Just because you don't sign a contract doesn't mean that no contract exists.

If I walk into a shop, put something in my basket, take it to the till and they ring up the price and I pay them, I have engaged in a legally binding contract.

I have made my offer to purchase, and the shop has accepted it by taking my money.

They can't then turn round and say "actually, we've changed our mind and you now owe us another million dollars for that can of beans, and if you walk out the door we'll call the cops and charge you with theft of a million and one dollars worth of beans".

At the point they accept your money, the force of contract law, as well as any relevant consumer protection laws come into effect.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Vegas wasn't like the 50 years ago. try 70.

You sure?

From the article "Las Vegas was a gold mine for the Mafia from 1963 to 1966."

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Someone please mod this up, it is not flamebait to disagree strongly with a sociopath.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

There is a difference, which you seem intellectually incapable of grasping, between a one-off genuine mistake and a sustained attempt to abuse a flaw you have found in a system.

This is where the slashdot "if I am physically able to do something, there is nothing you can do to prevent me, and therefore it should be legal" attitude shows itself for the sociopathic nonsense it is.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Technically you're probably right, however I know that Casinos in Vegas do actually keep photographs and blacklists - if someone is in their books as being a "cheater" (to include card counting), the Casino is well within it's right to escort them from the premises.

Well, that alone makes me side with the guy - if you advertise a game with some rules and then enforce a "but we'll only admit losers to the game" policy, you're already rigging it. Even if it were immoral per se for the guy to walk away with the money, I think that in the grand scheme of things, it would be only a tiny upwards adjustment of bad karma for the gaming industry.

You don't understand how gambling works. The casino/bookmaker/whoever WANTS people to win, just not all the time. If no one ever won anything, they wouldn't bother gambling, would they?

Obviously, they are a business and so they want to make a profit overall, but it's like lottery games: they love it when someone wins a massive jackpot that's been rolled over a few times.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

You don't know what "theft by taking" means, do you?

If I see someone leave their wallet on the seat of a restaurant, and I pick it up and trouser the cash, I have stolen their money.

If I find an envelope full of notes in the middle of an empty street, pick it up and trouser the cash, I have still stolen the money.

The facts that in the latter case (a) I don't know who the rightful owner is and (b) I'll probably get away with it if there are no witnesses around are both irrelevant from a legal point of view.

That's the way it is in the UK, anyway.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

The machine was programmed to work this way. He didn't trick anything.

He tricked you into thinking that because this is a programmable computer, therefore the laws on theft doesn't apply.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Exactly. For example if I am playing poker and have a lousy hand, but bid high to trick the other players into folding, then that's fraud too. If I use that trick to make money then I'm stealing from the house.

Right?

No, because it is perfectly within the rules of poker to do that.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software

And if I use my fingers and eyes to write a mental program that allows me to beat the house at blackjack(e.g. card counting), is that hacking too? No, it's strategy.

He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software.

Bullshit. He's playing the game as it is implemented. He found a strategy that allowed him to win more than the casino intended. The game might be unfairly balanced against the casino, but that's the casino's fault.

The technical details of how his strategy works doesn't change the fact that it's a strategy. And discovering winning strategies is the whole point of playing games.

If I'm playing blackjack and I invent a way of seeing through the cards so that I know exactly what the dealer's got, and what cards are coming up next, is this "strategy" or "cheating". I know what I'd call it.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

I remember a story about people trying to game a casino. They bought a video poker machine they'd found had a faulty random number generator or something and put it through various tests. They got to the point where after playing a few rounds on the machine they could determine when to push particular buttons to generate large payouts, assuming the player could hit the button within the right time window.

Sounds like cheating and theft to me.

If they discovered such a flaw, the correct thing to do, legally and morally, was to report it to the manufacturers.

I'm sorry, I simply do not believe in the sociopathic "anything's OK as long as I get away with it" attitude of some people here. I suppose I just wasn't force fed enough Scientology and Ayn Rand books as a kid.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Kilo Kilo]

The customer is merely making the best of the situation. The worker is defrauding 7/11, since she was hired to do a job that she's clearly not capable of doing correctly.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

you can't cheat a computer., you can only operate it within it's programmed bounds.

It would be interesting to be a software developer if every programming bug was the responsibility of the person who created it. I'd love to be the insurance broker quoting for your professional liability insurance.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tehcyder]

Pretty much everything about banking is fraud.

That still doesn't mean that you're right to rob a bank.

Re: Fraud is fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it is true. There are positive expectation machines (over 100% return) at lots of casinos, though usually only at the lowest denominations. You can find a database of the best machines in most US casinos at vpfree2.com. And at some casinos, there are machines which are close enough to 100% that become positive if you add in cash back, free play, comps, and other promotions. I know retirees who make six figures a year playing $1 to $5 video poker for a few hours most days a week, and high rollers who can make even more playing much higher.

By law in Nevada, video poker machines must simulate a real deck of cards. Nevada won't even license a manufacturer that sells a non-random machine outside of Nevada.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[koyangi]

Erwin Rommel would disagree. He once said,"A risk is a chance you take; if it fails you can recover. A gamble is a chance taken; if it fails, recovery is impossible."

If you lose the bet (either player or house) then that money is gone. You can play again, but that is another gamble. The odds of winning on either side have nothing to do with it being a risk or gamble.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[i kan reed]

Then that wouldn't be fraud, moron. I can't believe how god-damned contentious the assertion that "fraud is bad" is with libertarians.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[gottabeme]

If you knowingly trick a computer into giving you money that's not yours, it's not any different than tricking a person into the same.

But that's exactly what poker is...

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Hatta]

If the casino places a mirror behind the dealer, and that gives me an unfair advantage, that's the casino's fault. That's exactly analogous to what happened here.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[tragedy]

With this sort of correct play, some video poker machines pay back over 100% in the long run.

Turns out, according to the article, if you find the correct way to play the machine to turn a profit, you get prosecuted.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[cayenne8]

But in this case, he didn't do anything TO the machine unlawful, he didn't modify it.

According to the approved and tested code on this machine, it was acting according to its code. He merely used the machine as it was coded to act.

No crime here.

Just because said code wasn't to the benefit of the owner is not the customers fault, nor his responsibility.

Much like card counting is not illegal and not a cheat, if done without mechanical aid, since it is playing the system based on the rules given, he was playing this machine based on the rules coded within it.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Nyder]

That is probably the point the parent was making.

Yep.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[nabsltd]

The theory would rely on Video Poker being the *one* slot machine in the casino that uses random chance in shuffling.

Video poker isn't a slot machine, and the shuffling is purely random.

The skill comes in knowing what cards to keep on the "hard" hands, but other people have figured it out for you, so you don't have to be as "smart", just have a good memory.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[Vlado]

Standard poker (not the video version) is the only game that I know of in casinos, where the house doesn't care who wins.
The reason is that the house gets cut from all the players. So as long as the game keeps going, the house is happy.

So you're right. Poker isn't (only) about luck, if you know what you're doing. On the other hand your post is not related to the issue being discussed.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[equiners]

As much as I see clearly that there is fraud I cringe at your comparison of a computer to a human. I guess I am still reeling from the comparison of a corporation to a person.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[david_thornley]

Getting more cash than I asked for from an ATM is obviously a mistake. I told the machine to give me a $20 and deduct $20 from my checking account. The amount I'm supposed to get is known.

In this case, I tell the machine to give me a variable amount of money (likely none, perhaps a small amount, on rare occasions a large amount), and it does. I don't know how much I'm supposed to get out of the machine. Since casinos like to advertise people who won big, perhaps I'm just getting lucky and will wind up on a billboard. It's normal for people to get more than they put in on occasion.

Moreover, gamblers often have beliefs that something is hot. If I asked a casino employee whether I should stop playing at a machine that I was making money at, would the employee say, "Why don't you go away while we check this out?" rather than "No, why don't you play it as long as it's hot."? A customer's belief that he or she is hot is normally money in the bank for the casino.

Given a long enough lucky streak, I could eventually arrive at a conclusion that the machine was definitely overpaying, rather than me being lucky, but that's a long streak indeed, considering I'd need to account for the possibility that I'm the lucky one in the hundreds or thousands of people in the casino, and I don't know what or when the machine is supposed to pay out. Most people don't have my knowledge of statistics, and could legitimately believe they were lucky for a lot longer.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[alexo]

"Intentionally abusing a process in bad faith can be a crime,"
no.

"and should be a crime"
never. If this is the case the consumer becomes responsible for every possible mistake. That is a path I don't want to travel.

Do you want a bill for a product you got charged the wrong price for? Do you want to be responsible for any possible mistake a store/corporation might do?

I think you missed the "in bad faith" part.

Re:Fraud is fraud

[AK Marc]

You don't have any requirement to report it, and you are "allowed" to spend it, but may face civil penalties if you spend money that's not yours and don't replace it. In other places, you have a duty to report errors, and a legal requirement to not abuse errors, so that if you spend some of the accidental money, you can go to jail, not just get sued (but you can get sued too).

In the US, you either spend it and wait for the lawsuit, or keep quiet and hope they don't notice before the statute of limitations is reached, at which time it is legally yours (the other poster said 90 days, and that sound right, but this is not legal advice).

Re:Fraud is fraud

[squiggleslash]

Wait, so an American bank is using commonsense and not running to get people prosecuted over what, in the great scheme of things, is a minor abuse of a minor screw up, while a British bank is doing the opposite?

Well, there has to be one case...

Re: Fraud is fraud

[squiggleslash]

I don't necessary agree with the GP, but I think his entire point was that the machine in question was implementing a game. As such I'm finding it hard to see the relevance of a snack machine having an exploitable fault.

Abuse of civil matters

[briancox2]

This looks to me like a civil matter. That is, if there had never been the DMCA. There is a recent trend by big corporations to abuse the criminal court systems to resolve their disputes with the heavy hand of govnernment. I don't think it will stop until we stand up and demand government that is FOR the people.

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[Anonymous Coward]

well, I stood up and said it.. but then everyone in the cube farm turned around and looked at me funny so I sat back down

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[gl4ss]

yeah..

when you're doing anything involves a computer, then every dispute suddenly becomes a federal offence. not really that well thought out.

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[gfxguy]

How does this violate DMCA? This has zero to do with copyright, and even if you wanted to push it, has nothing to do with circumventing ANYTHING. All they had to do was repeatedly push the cash-out button.

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[AlKaMo]

This looks to me like a civil matter. That is, if there had never been the DMCA.

You're confusing DMCA and CFAA. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act pre-dates DMCA by more than 10 years and was initially designed to target '80s era hackers.

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[briancox2]

Ok fine. My legal point about the trend of companies to force civil matters to be legal matters still stands.

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[BitZtream]

When it involves $400k ... it tends to become something that the feds get involved in, even if its just to ask the local cops what help they might need as its big enough to warrants the experience of higher level investigators.

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[gandhi_2]

The presence of a cryptographic security measure in the device will probably be enough to bring DMCA into it. ):

Re:Abuse of civil matters

[girlintraining]

I don't think it will stop until we stand up and demand government that is FOR the people.

I demand a government FOR the people!

Hangon a second, someone's knocking at my door...

After RTFA

[John Napkintosh]

I don't see this as being a criminal act, but given the way that it was carried out, I think the casino has every right to demand 9/10 of his winnings back.

You win a game at the $1 level, exploit a bug to change your cash level to $10 before accepting the payout, and then accept your payout. Well, you didn't actually make the bet at the $10 level, so you shouldn't expect your winnings to be multiplied by 10, but that's what's happening here. I'd argue that he's still entitled to the original 1x amount and let the casino ban him if they want to.

Re:After RTFA

[K. S. Kyosuke]

I don't see this as being a criminal act, but given the way that it was carried out, I think the casino has every right to demand 9/10 of his winnings back.

As far as I understand it, he already gave them more money than he ever won (a megabuck?).

Re:After RTFA

[briancox2]

You're right. As a result of a civil case, I would expect him to have to pay back the money. But claiming he is a criminal is not necessary. We used to have the view in this country that anything which could be handled properly as a civil matter, SHOULD be handled as a civil matter.

Our legal system and law enforcement system has enough to deal with without imprisoning people over financial disputes.

Re:After RTFA

[egcagrac0]

The casino will probably dispute that.

Most machines around here are tagged "Malfunction voids all pays and plays" - if they can demonstrate that this is, in fact, a malfunction, then they may reasonably claim the payout value (but not any deposited credit in the machine).

Re:After RTFA

[Jawnn]

I don't see this as being a criminal act, but given the way that it was carried out, I think the casino has every right to demand 9/10 of his winnings back.

Under the law, the have no such right. Players are not responsible for malfunctioning gaming machines. Indeed, the casino can not even force you away from such a machine if it is accepting wagers and paying according to the published schedule. Walk away from it though, even if only for a moment, and it's game over, literally. This actually happened to a friend of mine years ago, during a visit to Reno. He'd stumbled onto a slot that was "stuck on win". They wanted very badly to have him get up so that they could take the machine out of service, and after a short while enticed him to do so, much to his later (and more sober) regret.

Re:After RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Players are not responsible for malfunctioning gaming machines. Indeed, the casino can not even force you away from such a machine if it is accepting wagers and paying according to the published schedule.

He was getting 10x the published schedule.

Re:After RTFA

[tgeek]

Except the machine did not malfunction. It did as it was programmed to do. The fact that it didn't do what the casino expected it to do does not make it a malfunction. The casino should be addressing this with the vendor if they want their money back.

Re:After RTFA

[Bob the Super Hamste]

As much as I believe that they would argue this it seems like that was not a malfunction but instead the machine did exactly as it was told. There wasn't a part the broke inside or some random short that cropped up so one would think that it becomes quite difficult to claim that it was a malfunction. That won't stop the casino from trying and probably succeeding in doing so though.

Re:After RTFA

[mythosaz]

So, by your definition, all software is functioning perfectly at all times, since whatever instructions they have are de facto right?

Uh oh. Bluescreen and all of my credits are gone. Sorry, not a malfunction. The software did as it was programmed to do, and sometimes that includes crashes.

It would sometimes give him 10x more money than it should, because the software "wasn't malfunctioning."

Absurd.

Re:After RTFA

[neminem]

We have a phrase for that, "works as coded", and it is a sarcastic phrase that we make fun of mercilessly. The fact that the rules were clearly printed on the machine as to how it was supposed to behave, and it was clearly behaving differently than that (and in a way that was obviously not intended behavior) makes it a malfunction. It was a software malfunction rather than hardware, but clearly still a malfunction.

Going to jail for it? That'd be a bit of an overreaction. But he should definitely have to give back his unearned winnings.

Re:After RTFA

[BitZtream]

Under the law, the have no such right. Players are not responsible for malfunctioning gaming machines.

Oh yes they are. Both parties are responsible for reporting and appropriately dealing with KNOWN issues. Both sides are granted legal immunity for UNKNOWN issues, but they BOTH require ALL plays AND pays to become void. Everyone goes back to their 'pre-play' state financially. What you're claiming is legal is exactly when it becomes fraud, when they continue taking advantage of the game they KNOW is not working properly.

Indeed, the casino can not even force you away from such a machine if it is accepting wagers and paying according to the published schedule.

Because by definition, that would not be malfunctioning. If it followed the published schedule, he wouldn't have been getting 10x what the published schedule said, would he?

They wanted very badly to have him get up so that they could take the machine out of service, and after a short while enticed him to do so, much to his later (and more sober) regret.

You watch too many movies. They can, will, and DO move people off of machines to service them. The only time it is 'good' for you to 'stay' on a machine is if it is malfunctioning. It does not offer you any advantage to continue to play on a machine over time, regardless of time since last pay out. The odds don't actually work like you think they do. There is no pattern of timing that will allow you to get batter than break even odds out of a slot machine. This is a popular misconception of what 'odds' actually mean. 1 in 100 does not mean that if you throw 100 times, its going to happen once.

Re:After RTFA

[countach]

OK, but who is to say what the right behavior is in this case? It's not like people are provided with a software specification before they put their money in the slot. There are lots of scenarios where the right set of fruit or cards in the fruit machine results in some bonus or doubling or whatever complicated rules, that the typical slot player doesn't understand.

Re:After RTFA

[countach]

I highly doubt the entire rules of the machine are printed on the front. The behavior of these machines is just far too complicated to turn into prose and print on the front.

Re:After RTFA

[PuZZleDucK]

The software was tested and certified to be free of defects and in compliance with the standards. This machine was running software that checks out against the certification. The player does not get the specs, but the regulators and casinos do.

Re:After RTFA

[egcagrac0]

The rules are generally displayable by help screens.

Re:After RTFA

[SpaceLifeForm]

Exactly. They should pay him that much for finding the bug, as obviously they could have lost that much or more if not found. In fact, they may have already lost more than that because other people may have found it also, but they just did not play enough to make it obvious.

Re:After RTFA

[tehcyder]

Blue screens are statistically almost always caused by hardware failures.

Bullshit, pure and simple.

Back in the "good old days" of still using Windows 95 to ME (I was young and needed the money), PCs would blue screen not infrequently. Almost always, if you re-installed windows, they stopped crashing, at least for a while.

Do you seriously think the failed hardware coincidentally (and magically) repaired itself?

Re:After RTFA

[tehcyder]

I don't see this as being a criminal act, but given the way that it was carried out, I think the casino has every right to demand 9/10 of his winnings back.

Under the law, the have no such right. Players are not responsible for malfunctioning gaming machines. Indeed, the casino can not even force you away from such a machine if it is accepting wagers and paying according to the published schedule. Walk away from it though, even if only for a moment, and it's game over, literally. This actually happened to a friend of mine years ago, during a visit to Reno. He'd stumbled onto a slot that was "stuck on win". They wanted very badly to have him get up so that they could take the machine out of service, and after a short while enticed him to do so, much to his later (and more sober) regret.

Really?. If a machine malfunctioned and just started spewing out winnings without anyone even touching it, are you saying that the casino would have to let the person sitting in front of it keep all the money until it was empty?

Re:After RTFA

[wildstoo]

In my experience, they WERE almost always caused by buggy device drivers, and Windows' poor handling of buggy device drivers, rather than the hardware.

Windows' handling of device driver failures has greatly improved over time, so now when a (for example) display driver has a shit-fit, Windows can successfully recover, rather than just barfing a blue screen, so maybe NOW your point is more valid, but it certainly wasn't prior to the introduction of Windows Driver Foundation.

Re:After RTFA

[dgatwood]

For you, sure. But given that you're the sort of person who reads this site, you almost certainly add lots of aftermarket hardware to your computer. This means that you're not a typical computer user.

The average computer plugs in maybe an external hard drive (which doesn't usually require its own drivers unless you're doing stupid crap like half-***ed encryption), maybe an iPhone/iPod/iPad, and that's about it. And major hardware vendors generally put in a significant amount of QA testing on their drivers to minimize BSODs that occur with any frequency. So for an average computer user, assuming up-to-date drivers and Windows SPs, I'd expect a computer exhibiting BSODs to be caused by bad RAM at least nine times out of ten, even when running older versions of Windows.

Re:After RTFA

[dgatwood]

Do you seriously think the failed hardware coincidentally (and magically) repaired itself?

Ever take a look at filesystem metadata produced by a computer with bad RAM? I have. It's not pretty. Reinstalling results in a fresh copy of critical system files, which are then (temporarily) not corrupt.

Can't cheat an honest man

[egcagrac0]

The point of the machines (from the player perspective) is to stick in money, push buttons, and make it dispense more money (vouchers) than you put in.

The house edge comes from the fact that pushing the buttons correctly in all situations is difficult.

This guy did it right. If the house wants to fix the "bug" that allowed him to take out more money than they thought he should, that's their right.

Prosecution on this one... very grey area.

But I'll forward the how-to on to my video poker friends, just in case they find a machine with those firmware revisions, so that they'll be sure not to expose themselves to prosecution in this manner.

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[houghi]

So one the one way we have an individual. On the other we have a company.
Who will they decide for? Grey area? Not so much.

When talking about the law, I bet it is in favor of the house here as well.

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[Sancho]

With video poker, the house edge is built in to the device. The edge is that the payout schedule beats the odds of getting the hand.

In this case, the machine was defective, which generally voids all plays (this is usually written on the machines.)

The defect was that a player could trick the machine into thinking more money had been wagered than actually had been. This means that the payout schedule could be higher than the odds of getting the hand.

The guy shouldn't be charged with a crime, but the casino almost certainly has the right to demand the money back (unless they failed to post the warning about voiding plays.)

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[SuperKendall]

Who will they decide for? Grey area? Not so much.

Why not? The first judge already recommended dismissal; he's already doing better than the company. No reason why that should not continue to be so.

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[egcagrac0]

the casino almost certainly has the right to demand the money back (unless they failed to post the warning about voiding plays.)

I'll agree that IF the casino can demonstrate that there was a malfunction BEFORE they paid, then yes, they have a right to invalidate the payout.

If they've already paid, I don't think they have any more right to demand their money back than an individual would after losing a game.

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[wvmarle]

And next you'd have to successfully argue that a software bug causes the machine to be defective.

And if i's indeed found to be defective: how about payouts to all other winners that have used the same machine over the same period of time? Do they also all have to hand back their winnings?

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[c_g_hills]

Since every machine was running the same software, that means every single machine was defective so the casino should be entitled to every single cent of winnings on these machines where double-up was turned on.

Re:Can't cheat an honest man

[halcyon1234]

The house edge comes from the fact that pushing the buttons correctly in all situations is difficult.

Minor correction: The house edge comes from the fact that even if you pushed all the buttons correctly in all the situations, you will still lose more than you win.

The house edge is rocketed into mindblowingly huge profit margins when the majority of people don't push the buttons correctly in the majority of situations.

No idea how he stumbled upon that

[TheNastyInThePasty]

From TFA: Kane began by selecting a game, like Triple Double Bonus Poker, and playing it at the lowest denomination the machine allows, like the $1.00 level. He kept playing, until he won a high payout, like the $820 at the Silverton.

Then he’d immediately switch to a different game variation, like straight “Draw Poker.” He’d play Draw Poker until he scored a win of any amount at all. The point of this play was to get the machine to offer a “double-up”, which lets the player put his winnings up to simple high-card-wins draw. Through whatever twist of code caused the bug, the appearance of the double-up invitation was critical. Machines that didn’t have the option enabled were immune.

At that point Kane would put more cash, or a voucher, into the machine, then exit the Draw Poker game and switch the denomination to the game maximum — $10 in the Silverton game.

Now when Kane returned to Triple Double Bonus Poker, he’d find his previous $820 win was still showing. He could press the cash-out button from this screen, and the machine would re-award the jackpot. Better yet, it would re-calculate the win at the new denomination level, giving him a hand-payout of $8,200.

Re:No idea how he stumbled upon that

[Anonymous Coward]

He stumbled upon it by playing $12 million worth of video poker. When someone has played that much video poker, I'd be more surprised if they didn't find an exploitable bug somewhere.

Re:No idea how he stumbled upon that

[Sancho]

I always wonder how people run across crazy sequences of button presses that trigger bugs while on live hardware. This reminds me of the various iPhone lock-screen bypasses.

Found it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Up Up
Down Down
Left Right
Left Right
B A
Profit!

no sympathy for the casino

[Chirs]

As long as he didn't do anything but push the standard control buttons, I think he's entitled to whatever he can get.

If the casino thinks they're paying out too much, they can sue the maker of the video poker machine.

Re:no sympathy for the casino

[JBHarris]

Standard Control Buttons on a PC are the keyboard....If someone used the "standard control buttons" on a keyboard on a PC to steal money from a bank account by planting or taking advantage of an existing vulnerability we would plainly see the problem with that. But, if you take those keys off a keyboard and print simple icons on them, it becomes OK to do this?

Re:Welp

[egcagrac0]

I am going to have a very bad day when I get back to work tomorrow.

Not if IGT has published a correction and it's been properly applied already.

Affected firmware levels are listed in the exhibit attached to the motion to dismiss linked in TFA.

Versus humans

[Larry_Dillon]

If it had been a human dealer that repeatedly made mistakes, would it have been fraud?

The odds are generally "rigged" in the house's favor. Casinos that that anything that threatens their "entitlement" to be cheating.

Re:Versus humans

[turp182]

The odds aren't "rigged" in any game where a human is in control. The house is always going to win due to statistics. A dealer would quickly be caught if he/she "rigged" the game in a persons favor.

The guy in question just figured out a method of pushing existing buttons that "rigged" the game in his favor.

The game maker is at fault, not the person who figured out how to take advantage of it. They let the bug into the system. No hacking was involved, just pressing the buttons that were available.

A counter-suit to reclaim defense expenses would be the appropriate measure in my opinion, not that my opinion regarding legal issues is worth event 2 cents...

Re:Versus humans

[wvmarle]

A counter-suit to reclaim defense expenses would be the appropriate measure in my opinion, not that my opinion regarding legal issues is worth event 2 cents...

They'd first have to win the current case conclusively. And if they win, well sure they'd sue for cost.

New Monopoly Chance Card

[organgtool]

"Casino error in your favor. Go directly to jail"

Many software bugs are found that way

[JoeyRox]

It's not unusual for a software bug to require multiple steps to manifest, and many times those steps are arrived at through chance.

Best tested for bugs and fllaws

[dutchwhizzman]

Gambling machines are probably better tested for bugs and flaws that most military computer equipment. I'm not kidding, the amount of testing vendors *and* the US government puts gambling machines through before they get set loose on the general public is humongous. If both the vendor and the US government didn't classify this bug in their rigorous testing, it's not a bug. Either that, or *all* gambling machines are tested inadequately and should be pulled from casinos immediately. I wonder what costs more, pulling all gambling machines and retesting them with a new to devise method, or just letting this guy keep the money and pulling only video poker.

Correct, the casino is the offender here

[dutchwhizzman]

By admitting they let people play a machine that contained buggy software, the casino admits they committed a federal offense. The guy that's being charged now was just playing the machine by the rules the machine gave him. Nothing more, nothing less. The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They might want to make you believe a small part of their explanation of the truth, but they are leaving large bits of it out that is incriminating them, not the guy that has pulled the money out.

Apples and oranges

[Gription]

There is a major difference in the two situations...
The UK scenario is people accessing a machine designed to give them their own money from their own bank accounts. Doubling the money as you remove it in no way resembles any intended purpose for the machine.

The video poker machine is a situation where the machine is intended to supply an opportunity for the users to extract as much money from the machine as possible. While they are doing this they are supposed to try to accomplish this by spending the least quantity of cash possible. The coding of the machine is supposed to try to counter the user's intent to acquire as much money as possible.
I find it hard for them to cry foul when someone is overly successful at accomplishing the intended purpose unless the user was directly altering or interfering with the operation of the machine. That doesn't appear to be the case here. The machine was simply following its program as supplied by the manufacturer.

Re:Apples and oranges

[gnasher719]

The real difference is what the law of the country in question says. For example, in Germany up to the late 70's to commit fraud you had to deceive _a person_. That's what the law said. Deceiving your bank's cash machine wouldn't have been fraud (the law was eventually changed).

Programmer Error Or Programmer Intent?

[Jane Q. Public]

Maybe the guy who programmed the firmware did it intentionally. Just a thought. But it's a valid one. How the hell would this guy know?

Seriously. Maybe the programmer put in a "back door" so he could get a few dollars in winnings when he went to Vegas. How do we know otherwise? In which case this player was not committing fraud at all... the machine would have been doing exactly as it was intended to do by the programmer.

And there is probably no way to prove it either way. So let the guy go.

Re:Programmer Error Or Programmer Intent?

[networkBoy]

Other than it being a crime for the programmer to play on the games.

Re:Programmer Error Or Programmer Intent?

[Jane Q. Public]

Other than it being a crime for the programmer to play on the games.""

Well, of course. It would be illegal for the programmer. I think that's a given. But... wouldn't that make it NOT illegal for the other guy? I am pretty sure it would. Because he would only be doing what it was intentionally programmed to do.

Re:Programmer Error Or Programmer Intent?

[tehcyder]

The law doesn't work by saying "if you can come up with any kind of ridiculously outlandish and entirely unverifiable alternative explanation for a crime you're accused of, you're therefore not guilty of it". You can always explain anything away: if nothing else, there's the "invisible supernatural forces froze time and completely re-wrote reality while I was unconscious" argument.

"Beyond a reasonable doubt" means exactly that. Human justice can never be 100% sure of the truth, which is why it doesn't even claim to.

Re:Programmer Error Or Programmer Intent?

[JimFive]

No, it doesn't work that way. What matters is if the player is playing the game as intended by the owner of the game, not the programmer. The player is committing a crime as soon as he intentionally takes advantage of the fact that the machine is not playing by the stated rules. Note the key words, intentionally takes advantage. The first time the player accidentally mashes all the buttons and the machine pays out extra he didn't commit a crime. When he does it again just to see if it happens again then he might have committed a crime. When he tells his friends and they use the trick to beat the machine then they have all committed a crime.
--
JimFive

Re:Programmer Error Or Programmer Intent?

[Jane Q. Public]

"No, it doesn't work that way. What matters is if the player is playing the game as intended by the owner of the game, not the programmer."

Nonsense. The owner of the game has very little say in the matter. They don't write the law.

I can write software to do damn near anything I want. That doesn't mean other people are obligated to do it that way. At most that would be a violation of terms of service, not the law.

"The player is committing a crime as soon as he intentionally takes advantage of the fact that the machine is not playing by the stated rules."

Again, nonsense. The player commits a crime when he violates the LAW. Since when do software companies write the law? If it worked the way you state, then software companies could, in effect, write their own laws by dictating the rules of the game. Now... it may be that there is a law that specifically says that in Nevada, but I'm far from convinced that such a law exists. I'd want to see it. As far as I know there is no such law anywhere else. Even CFAA does not contain such specific language.

"When he does it again just to see if it happens again then he might have committed a crime. When he tells his friends and they use the trick to beat the machine then they have all committed a crime."

Again, I'd have to be shown the specific law saying that. I'm not aware of one. It may be against the law to violate the House rules. I don't know. But since when do the House rules pertain specifically to operating software in a particular way?

If you can show me an actual law that backs up your claims, I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong. But until I see one, call me skeptical.

Cheat codes

[PraiseBob]

Is "Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start" hacking? Thats essentially what he did, just fewer button presses.

It may be a cheat code, and an unintended exploit, but to call it hacking is a stretch. Don't some games reward you more for winning multiple times in a row? Isn't that in fact commonplace? How is he supposed to read the minds of the programmers and know that this was unintended behavior rather than his reward for winning multiple times?

Not always so

[SuperKendall]

If you knowingly trick a computer into giving you money that's not yours

How is this really any different than computer glitches that offer items on sale on websites for pennies on the dollar? In those cases people scream that the merchant must honor the purchase, even though it means the merchant is out a ton of money by doing so.

Just because there is a bug in a program does not make benefitting from it fraud, especially not from a state machine designed to spit out money. He just figured out a more beneficial path.

useing standard control buttons to get into amt se

[Joe_Dragon]

useing standard control buttons to get into amt setting menu and useing default password to set a ATM to make it think that it has less cash in it then it really does = jail

Taking advantage of computer glitch?

[dgharmon]

"was it a criminal violation of federal anti-hacking law for Kane and a friend to knowingly take advantage of the glitch to the tune of at least half-a-million dollars?"

Wasn't there a case some time back where some stock traders noticed a pattern in an HFT automated trading program, and acted to make some trades to game the system. They were fined even though they did nothing more that make stock trades ...

casinos should embrace this

[dochin]

Casinos should embrace it. Follow me here. There are only a handful of reasons to waste money on video poker: 1. You rarely visit casinos and you haven't figured out it's not that much fun yet 2. You love gambling 3. You love gambling too much 4. You've figured out how to lose slowly enough that the free drinks balance it out 5. Your friends are wasting even more money losing at other casino games and you have to kill time 6. You hope that the machine will magically grant you a money wish The key is number 6. It's hard to feel any sympathy for the casinos that rake in billions upon billions due to false hope, boredom, and addiction. Nevertheless I offer to them this suggestion: embrace it. Let us, the foolish masses, believe that maybe some day (if we're lucky) we could actually figure out a way to beat the machine. The questionable winnings of this crew are a bargain for this kind of marketing. Let the false hope roll.

Re:I think the older IGT games are in mame need to

[jonwil]

I think (based on what I read) MAME wont support gambling games that are still being produced or that are new enough to still be in casinos.

Las Vegas?

[shentino]

This case should have been simple.

Charge him with cheating. This is Nevada, which makes it a felony.

There was no need to even bring the feds into this at all.

Re:useing standard control buttons to get into amt

[wvmarle]

"standard control buttons" implies "those available to the player/public". I doubt you can completely control the innards of an ATM through the keypad on the outside. If so, it'd be a major insecurity.

Re:useing standard control buttons to get into amt

[egcagrac0]

Not completely, but do a search for "Tranax manual download". A fair number of people have managed to do enough.

by playing $12 million worth of video poker...

[girlinatrainingbra]

Re: He stumbled upon it by playing $12 million worth of video poker.
.
Good point. Certainly the amount of time he's invested in playing $12M worth of video poker means that he's seen a lot of interesting combinations and tried out multiple variations and permutations of which games to play in which sequence. He's accidentally stumbled upon a way of playing that causes the machine to behave in his favor. Exploiting that, however, is not quite moral, though. And the casino, having allowed erroneous software to pass onto the casino floor in hardware, is also at fault. How did the Gaming Commission allow this to happen? I thought they vetted all of the hardware and software in Vegas?

Re:Casino owners are scum

[tehcyder]

Whether or not it was legal, I don't see this as immoral.

I suppose you're the sort of person who blames drinks' manufacturers for alcoholism?

Re:What if...?

[tehcyder]

===Off topic. In the early 1980's I bought a Bobbi Fischer Chess computer. At the time it was one of the more advanced ones, costing $150-ish range. It had a flaw. Sometimes the computer would play and illegal move. It would Castle out of check. It wouldn't let you do that move, but it would do it.

And guess what? A few years ago I bought the dominant computer chess program from Ubisoft. It does the same error! Did Ubisoft just buy the code from the Bobby Fischer game, and add on some flashy videos and design of the chess set?

I've played a variety of chess games. I'm not particularly good, but I do know the rules. You'd be surprised how many games, especially the online ones, appear to have been written by people who don't. I've come across games that let you castle out of check, that let you move the king across check, that don't recognise pawns taking en passant, that force you to take a promoted pawn as a queen, and so on.

There really aren't that many rules to chess, it's amazing how people can even begin to write a chess program without understanding all of them.

Superior knowledge of the rules isn't fraud

[pmikell]

I don't see how this can be considered cheating. Receiving more money than you put in is within normal operation for a gambling machine, the software running on the machine is an expression of the rules of the game, and he played strictly according to the letter of the rules as expressed in that software. It's not his fault that the rules weren't exactly what the casino thought they were.

Look way back

[DriveDog]

This is very much like the guy who figured out the algorithm for the Press Your Luck TV game show machine. He just kept winning, while the PYL people realized something was going wrong for them. But they graciously handed over the winnings and redesigned the machine. PYL greatly benefitted just from the publicity about the show in general, not to mention royalties from replaying that episode of the game repeatedly for years to come. The casinos should pay up, then extract whatever they can get out of the manufacturer. I'm not surprised that they're pursuing the players, since their policy is to attack anyone doing anything defined as cheating by them. But 1) that doesn't mean the prosecutors have to do what the casinos want, and 2) that's a short-sighted policy. It would be smarter for the casinos to repair/replace the machines and keep quiet. Word would get around, and most likely there'd be an increase in revenue as people try to find bugs. Monitor the machines and quickly fix any bugs found. The end result will be more revenue, not less.

And yes, Cotton Thaggard was wrongly convicted (civil charge). The bank that pressed the issue likely netted less profit in the following years due to bad publicity.

Re:Look way back

[pmikell]

But they graciously handed over the winnings and redesigned the machine.

For small values of graciously. CBS initially refused to pay and accused Michael Larson of cheating.

Re:Look way back

[DriveDog]

Heh... I spoke that from memory, not having seen the full story, apparently. Shame on me. But more shame on all you zombies who'll do anything to avoid being embarrassed in public. Hide your faces. Pieces gonna fall on you.

not clearing out memory it reused

[DarthVain]

Sounds to me like the Computer in question had a "tell". Seems fine to me to take advantage of that. More realistic that way!

Otherwise it is like whining, hey no fair, you can figure out when I am bluffing or not, give me all the money I lost back. To which the response should be, well either don't play or become ( or design) a better poker player...