FickleGM
Explorer
I understand what you are saying, but I would still be wary. The line should be drawn at the point where a company (this would vary from company to company) deems the risk acceptable. If that means skirting the law and hoping not to get caught, fine. If that means dotting every i and crossing every t, fine.Balok the Strange said:I have a few thoughts to add here.
About a year ago, a publisher on RPGNow (Emerald Press to be precise) ran a customer appreciation program called "The 1 in 20 Reward". Basically it worked like this: One out of every 20 purchasers of Emerald Press material would win a free electronic copy of another Emerald Press book. Sadly, EP has since shut down, but at the time no one made even one comment on it or even paid any attention to it at all. How was that program any different than the one YGN is running?
What if the company running the program was based in say Uzbekistan? This is the internet we are dealing with, right? Anyone with a connection can enter the contest, including people where the contest would be illegal. What if the company is based in the US and the winner lives in some country where any form of gambling is illegal and punishable by death; would the company be considered liable for providing an outlet for the winner's habit?
Where exactly is the line drawn in the land of the World Wide Web?
What YGN does is their prerogative, but I don't think that advising them of the risks is that out of line. I say this because I really like Joe and Suzi and would hate for anything bad to happen to them.