Eye Of The Kraken

About Eye Of The Kraken

For each category, the guide explained pertinent legal provisions and recommended operational actions. 

In cases of identity fraud, operators were advised to close accounts upon establishing fraud and to reserve balances when bank account ownership cannot be confirmed.

Regarding account takeovers, the guide emphasised technical mitigations such as two-factor authentication for withdrawals and changes to banking details.

What is Eye Of The Kraken?

For reference, Konstakis is no stranger to OpenBet’s business. He has been involved with the business for a while, serving as its president. In this role, he has been closely involved in “driving the operational and commercial execution of the business and shaping its strategic priorities.”

In his new role, Konstakis will be responsible not only for OpenBet’s strategy, but also for its day-to-day business, growth initiatives, and tech priorities. At the same time, he will be tasked with “raising the bar” in how OpenBet serves its clients.

OpenBet emphasized that this change comes at a strong moment for the company and follows its incredibly successful delivery for customers through the World Cup. Throughout the tournament, OpenBet processed 175 million bets totaling $3 billion.

About Eye Of The Kraken

“Prediction markets have branded themselves as legal and safe, but the reality is they are not adhering to Connecticut’s consumer protection standards,” Lamont wrote in a statement.

While such orders have become customary around the nation this year, Connecticut’s missive took it one step further. The department also issued nearly 30 subpoenas to licensed gaming service providers and a bevy of media outlets. Those issued subpoenas include ones served to PayPal, Sportradar Solutions and Plaid, a payment processing app that holds a gaming licence. Although those companies are not under investigation, the subpoenas appear to be the first against service providers that conduct business with prediction markets in some form.

– In the wake of a consequential ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit against Kalshi, two operators are taking separate paths in an effort to overturn the decision. On 28 August, the Ninth Circuit ruled in a 3-0 decision that sports event contracts do not qualify as federally regulated swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. Earlier this week, Kalshi filed for an en banc re-hearing with the Ninth Circuit, this time before an 11-judge review. Robinhood, meanwhile, filed a petition of certiorari with the Supreme Court in a move to effectively bypass the Ninth Circuit. It is widely believed that a circuit split between the Ninth Circuit and a separate decision by the Third Circuit will prompt the Supreme Court to take up the case.