Samurai Fury

What is Samurai Fury?

Participants broadly accepted the principle that gambling information should be transparent and accessible, but many reported difficulty interpreting or using it effectively in practice. 

Technical data such as odds and rules were often obscured by delivery timing that came too late to influence decisions. 

This sense of understanding was also described as something that needed to be maintained continuously, rather than achieved only once and then relied upon. 

About Samurai Fury

“A proceeding aimed at impairing a single creditor is not the collective administration Chapter 15 contemplates, and the mismatch is not a technicality. It is part of the Debtors’ bad faith effort to forum shop for the most advantageous tool to use against their litigation adversary,” Skillz attorneys alleged.

The Debtors here deployed an insolvency statute against the one creditor whose judgment they wished to defer and compromise, left every ordinary-course creditor untouched, preserved their own equity, and sought releases for the insiders who directed the conduct that produced the judgment—then asked this Court to treat that machinery as proof that their affairs are centered in Israel,” the petition continued.

“The Court should refuse the relief requested by … because it is manifestly contrary to the public policy of the United States based on the Debtors’ well-documented and pervasive bad faith conduct,” the petition said. “The Debtors are using the Israeli Action—a limited action which lacks many of the core characteristics of a collective insolvency proceeding—as a strategic tool to evade responsibility for their deceptive conduct.”

What is Samurai Fury?

While Nevada is considered the top gaming state in the US, its regulatory framework related to technology has been seen as slow-moving and cluttered in comparison to other up-and-coming jurisdictions around the US. Ever since NGCB Chair Mike Dreitzer took over last June, modernisation has been a top priority, and these latest revisions are an extension of that.

“We finally got to a point where we said, you know what, let’s drop all our other efforts right now and get these over the finish line and get them up for comment so that we can make sure that we’re current with things,” Jeremy Eberwein, chief of the board’s Technology Division, told iGB.

The bulk of the work revolved around compiling and codifying the technical information in one place, Eberwein said. There were some existing Technical Standards, but other requirements lived in the state’s Minimum Internal Control Standards, which are a broad mix of technical and procedural requirements.