Quote from: game-protect on May 29, 2018, 02:26:57 PM

Quote from: OshiNick on May 28, 2018, 11:03:27 AM

Quote from: game-protect on May 24, 2018, 05:51:44 PM

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

Game protect is saying that Curaçao licence is of no validity.

I repeat, I never said that the 4 Curaçao licenses 1668/JAZ, 365/JAZ, 5536/JAZ of 8048/JAZ are of no validity. You are again lying and misleading the bitcointalk community in an attempt to fall into your SoftSwiss scam trap!

What I say is that your claim to operate under the 8048/JAZ license has no legal basis and you operate illegal!

Why?

1) Because key parts of the terms and conditions of your usage rights contract with license holder 8048/JAZ are intentionally and persistently not fulfilled, making it invalid!

2) Because key parts of the Curaçao licensing requirement laws are intentionally and persistently not fulfilled, making your usage rights contract with license holder 8048/JAZ invalid!

3) Because Curacao civil and criminal laws are intentionally and persistently breached, making your usage rights contract with license holder 8048/JAZ invalid!

And as you are a criminal blatant liar, your sole chance to draw victims into the SoftSwiss scam is to persistently blatant lie and brain washery of your potential dumb customers, clueless to understand even the basic things about contracts and rights! Roll Eyes

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

The sad part is that ~~game protect~~ oshi.io does understand this, but he's a charlatan and constantly lies for profit.

You are again lying and misleading the bitcointalk community, because you are the casino operator making profit from losses of your victims and not Game Protect! Roll Eyes

You have to be more specific with me.

No, you as the operator of a casino are obligated to check the laws and validity of your license and not the troll Game Protect.

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

- Which parts of our terms and conditions are you talking about?

I talk about the terms and conditions of the usage rights contract between Direx N.V. and Antillephone N.V. to operate under its 8048/JAZ license.

The 2 key conditions under its supervision and responsibility are intentionally and habitually not fulfilled by Antillephone N.V., making the issued non-exclusive right to operate under its 8048/JAZ license invalid!

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

- What parts of the Curaçao civil and criminal laws are being breached?

This question confirms that you as the operator of oshi.io who claims to operate under the 8048/JAZ license are clueless about Curacao civil and criminal laws!

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

- And how does this affect the licence Oshi is using?

I have not seen the white label contract and I do not know how it comes that the Antillephone N.V. seal status page claims that oshi.io operates under its 8048/JAZ license, even though (I assume) there is no direct contract between Antillephone N.V. and oshi.io.

However, if the usage rights contract between Direx N.V. and Antillephone N.V. is invalid, then anything below Direx N.V., like your white label contract with Direx N.V., is logically also invalid!

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

( Bear in mind, as a white label operator Oshi is actually owned and operated by Direx. All we do is the marketing. )

This statement confirms that Ivan Montik as managing director of Direx N.V. is your boss, while you previously denied it!

Quote from: OshiNick on May 21, 2018, 03:41:33 PM

Ivan is not my boss...

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

Furthermore, by saying our license is invalid, you're saying every Curaçao operator using any kind of white label service is also trading illegally.

First of all, I do not say your license is invalid, because the 8048/JAZ license holder is not authorized to transfer it and you have none.

I say the usage rights contracts between casinos and 1668/JAZ, 365/JAZ, 5536/JAZ or 8048/JAZ license holders to operate under its license is invalid, because the 2 key conditions under its supervision and responsibility are intentionally and habitually not fulfilled. There are additionally other key points that make these usage rights contracts invalid, but it is enough to refer to these 2 not fulfilled key conditions to back it up.

Quote from: OshiNick on May 24, 2018, 08:56:20 AM

Therefore your talking about hundreds of casino brands.

Correct. There are the 4 licenses 1668/JAZ, 365/JAZ, 5536/JAZ or 8048/JAZ and hundreds of invalid usage rights contracts claiming to operate under these 4 licenses!

Can you please define what you mean by 'usage rights'. You've never actually specified what they are...