LockPoker submits complaints Against Revolution Poker Network


Tuesday November 12,2013 : REVOLUTION VS. LOCK POKER LATEST (Update)
 
Lock submits complaints to licensing authority.
 
In an increasingly bitter dispute following its departure from the Revolution Poker Network , Lock Poker has reportedly filed three complaints with the Curacao Licensing Authority against Revolution owners IAA Services Ltd.
 
Reporting on the complaints, the information site Gambling911 reveals that Lock Poker is now operating on a stand-alone basis, using software from the now closed Partouche Poker Network, and that it has allied with former Partouche skin MyPok.fr.
 
Lock is querying the legitimacy of the licensing of a Revolution skin which it claims attempted to commandeer its players during the acrimonious departure from the network.
 
Lock also questions the Revolution software, which it claims is "…a violation of the terms of a License and Settlement Agreement that was entered into with 1st Technology Ltd. in relation to certain patents held by 1st Technology."
 
1st Technology and its CEO, Dr. Scott Lewis, was involved in patent actions some years ago regarding online gambling, threatening several major industry companies, with especially acrimonious litigation against the Bodog group . Playtech was among those which decided to licence with 1st Technology rather than tangle with the company.
 
A third Lock complaint involves alleged irregularities in the distribution of funds held in trust, and accusations that "…Lock [Poker] was provided with contradictory and conflicting information by the Revolution Network operator.”
 
Revolution had earlier claimed that Lock had not made payments due, and threatened to “…pursue Lock to the full extent possible by law to recover all monies owed and damages caused”.
 
Lock Poker responded by claiming it had already paid $8 million to Revolution, Gambling911 reports.
 
Revolution will now have an opportunity to respond to Lock's formal complaints to its licensing jurisdiction; it is clear that this dispute has a way to run yet.