I have done the same but, the software error was in my head.

This will settle and everyone, including the lawyers, will be happy. Besides, it is just electrons in some computer anyway.

Well they will settle, but the guy deserves the money. Casino's don't complain when the winning bell doesn't go off and you lose. Pay Up or you will lose more then a few million, when people start staying away.

On a side note, the slot machine manufacturer is also making the voting booths in most states now. They have a 50yr contract and a nice annual bonus during election years.

If the machine said he won the jackpot, then he won the jackpot. Hope he wins! The casinos has won a lot more that off of people gambling every day. If the machine maker is responsible, even in part, they should help pay the jackpot!

If anybody doesn't want the 2,000,000 euros, let me know. I'm still shopping, and I can hit Liz's auction !

This is exactly why I haven't been to a casino for over 25 years. They behave like a mafia and treat you as if you're an idiot. God, I hate their guts!

Lie and cheat over money" who would of thought.

Why do people throw their money away at crooked casinos when they can throw it away in the crooked stock market which at least let's you think you're winning a little before they take it all back, and more... ...or the same game for different levels of 'sophistication'? If you like the machines, Pachinko is a much more interesting pastime than the slots. If you like the market, entrepreneurship is way more interesting than trading. Both Pachinko and entrepreneurship are still rigged toward the 'house' but not quite so much or so blatantly as slots and stocks and are more fun. And entrepreneurship can pay off way better than any of the others and certainly will engage the adrenals big time if that is what you like. Building something new seems somehow more positive than flushing money down the gambling crapper.

In most modern slot machines the displays are really secondary. The real outcome of the "spin" in in the computer inside the machine. As much as one could argue that the person only got four and not the required five matches, one could just as easily argue that the problem was with the display and that the internal computer actually said that they got the required five matches on the "spin." How much do you want to bet that the memory on the computer inside that slot machine is going to be somehow inadvertently wiped or the computer is going to be found to have crashed and destroyed the data. The casino is going to have to very sure that this is not just a display error before they are going to allow anyone who is not in their employment to get anywhere near that computer. If they do find it is a display error and the five matches really do show in the computer then that computer memory will be history before anyone else gets anywhere near it. This is no where near as cut and dry as some people seem to think. The displays on the slot machines you see today are really only there for the player to see the result and have nothing to do with actually determining the results of the "spin."

"On a side note, the slot machine manufacturer is also making the voting booths in most states now. They have a 50yr contract and a nice annual bonus during election years."

Yep hired by the GOP....

Eltex: Did you happen to read that this was in AUSTRIA? I seriously doubt the company that made the slot machines is making the voting machines for the states, since AUSTRIA doesn't HAVE states.

Ourdoc: AUSTRIA.... The GOP really doesn't have any control there.

For those that did not bother to read the article, and failed in world geography "Bregenz, Austria" is in EUROPE.

Certainly, it's going to be cheaper to settle than push through court; however, other gaming ops are going to be watching closely, and may even pitch in for defense, etc... as precedent may be set (perhaps one has been one way or another, not overly familiar). But, my guess remains.... settlement in the thousands, not the millions.

DaveWH,

Corporations, which are people too, now, know no borders. I worked for an American company owned by an English company which printed the ballots for the South African vote that elected Mandela and printed currency for over 50 countries, including Great Britain. And they were interested in getting into American ballots and voting machines. Their chief competitor was Diebold, which made ATM's and voting machines as well as safes and vault doors like we did. Feeling safer now?

If the law limits max payouts to 2 million, that should've been the offer.

Don't be shocked if the casino ends up shelling a whole lot more than that.

It's not making up rules if they are already posted. Slot machine rules are on EVERY slot machine. If it states that he needs five to win the jackpot, he needs five.

If you are eating a meal and the computer prints out a bill of one million dollars do you still owe it?

Think

Earl-1443766

You might be able to fight the bill; but I'm sure the waitress is still going to want her 15% gratuity.

Malicha, funny. The bad guy is always the casino but, right is right.

If I recall, at least in the U.S., there is usually a disclaimer...something to the effect "malfunction voids all pays"...only getting 4 of 5 symbols required and a jackpot message sounds like a malfunction to me.

The computer 'error' could have just as easily been that the machine failed to display the fifth match... Since the machine indicated he was a winner, the burden is on the casino to prove otherwise.

Ray in Jax

My thoughts exactly.

The electronic slots of today are run by a time controlled computer chip which are individually programed and connected to the display.

As Ray in Jax stated; the machine just failed to display the fifth match...

Josh Brogan, put down the bottle and actually read the article next time.

And the winner is....the lawyers!

Why couldn't the computer error have been in displaying only four matches when it actually should have been five?

This case is far from being 'cut and dry'.

In civil court, they're called plaintiff and defendant, not prosecution and defense.

Not necessarily. All we know is that there was a computer error; but was the error:

A) that the 5th match should have come up

or

b) that the Flashing Screen shouldn't have come up

When dealing with software, you can't assume a causal relationship between the match and the win. Causation probably occurs between a 'randomly' generated number and the proscribed outcome of that number. That outcome should be 'display 5 matches + win' or 'display 4 matches + no win'.

Looks like the jury is going to get a crash course in C++ programming.

Really? Does it matter??? He has his lawyers 'defending' him. When I say defense, I'm pretty sure everybody here knows who I'm talking about.

And how are you to even know? This is Austrian courts. The sides could be called something altogether different from both of us.

That's not relevant though.

Raisa Ivanova: Are you showing us from where you are speaking?

It doesn't matter if the fault was with the display or the payout. All slot machines have the following statement on both the 'glass' and in the help screens:

"Malfunction voids all pays and plays."

Doesn't make a bit of difference what the malfunction was, this was obviously a malfunction and thus the payout is void.

Was Adolph Hitler an Austrian ? Just asking.

@JD in Vegas - you've inspected all slot machines in Bregenz, Austria?

Easy answer.

The program recognized that the 5th match was made and went into the "Win" routine or subroutine. It should have done the routine after the match but some programmer was so involved that he put the "call" before the "Display. The "Win" routine stays there till reset by the casino so it never gets a chance to return to the "Main" to do the "Display." Happens all the time and gets past the QC almost every time.

He has to get a sophena to examine the source code to find the error and then the casino operators have to prove that the "Display" DID run for the 5th non-match.

Depending on the speed of the computer running the machine, the computer may have " seen " the 5 match coming, and sounded the jackpot . If the display did not show, or showed only 4, that may be due to the computer sounding the jackpot before the 5 match appeared, and locked the machine. I think the guy will win, but only 2 million euros.

Bet this guy might settle for 2,000,000 euros (which is what, over $2,600,000?). Bet that I might.

But there WAS an error - any malfunction voids all pays and plays.

Since the play was voided, they may have to refund the amount he paid for that spin (they already offered more than that.)

Granted, in the US any computer error can void the play. Since this, however, was in Austria, the rules might be different there. But I'm sure they are still stacked in favor of the Casino.

Exactly... the machines usually have a sticker/sign that says "malfunction voids all pays and plays." If that's the case, I don't see how this guy has a chance in court.

They could claim that all winnig jackpots are computer error, take that sticker and stick it. I know I read all the fine print on slot machines. Get a grip.

Two points:

The malfunction issue, Checksum error trapping and other verification has been around forever (well, 25+ years). If there is an error the machine should have signalled the error, REFUNDED the cash in play automatically, and taken itself off-line. The display argument is frankly dubious as the display AND the winner alert are both products of programming. What is the payout history of the casino and the "game" maker?

The maximum jackpot issue, Since the machine has been publicly acknowledged to offer a 57million euro jackpot, although limited to 2million euros by Austrian law, the casino broke Austrian law. Makes one wonder how many other Austrian laws the casino breaks but won't admit. Just a tip to Americans, our casinos are rigged by the odds of the game and volume, regulated by the states, and are closer to home when you lose. Don't gamble with Austrian crooks.

It NEVER is his fault... ever.

But it could be when tackled at the line and you actually managed to get it in but the ref didn't see and refuses to score it.

Jaymanto,

As I recall, as long as a controlled ball passes the opposing goalline, it's a touchdown, regardless of where play ends. The machine apparently saw the controlled ball cross the goalline. By the way, I have seen this occur, both in live play and on tv, 6 points in both cases.

The article clearly states he only got 4 out of the 5 matches for the grand prize so we don't even need to read a computer chip. He didn't win the grand prize.

They didn't ban him for the slot malfunction. They banned him because he refused the settlement, thus signalling an intent to sue.

Hey, they gave him a meal too, heheh..

probably more than he walked in with.

but the malfunction could have been with the display and NOT the notification.