By
Mike
Shaw
Operators Convicted • IGT Sues Bally • Decision in Ohio
Distribs Bought • Easy Money • Ms. Pac-Man Catching Up
Atari's Battle • Relief From Copiers • ADMA Names Director
WAMO Convention • 8-Ball Champs • A.G.E. Nabbed Again
OPERATORS
CONVICTED
The state of Oregon is taking action against
operators of "gray area" games. In four
separate judgments, four operators have
been found guilty of violating state gam-
bling laws.
Three of the convicted operators are
members of the operators national asso-
ciation, the Amusement and Music Opera-
tors Association (AMOA) .
But Leo Droste, AMOA's executive
director, said he was unaware of the con-
victions and unsure whether or not the
AMOA Code of Ethics had been violated.
The Code says in part that operators "shall
comply with all laws and regulations per-
taining to our business."
AMOA's board of directors recently
voted to not distinguish between amuse-
ment only games and "gray area" gambling
devices at its annual show. While sources
indicate the vote was very close, Droste
would not release an exact count or identify
which members voted for or against
inclusion of video gambling machines at
AMOA's 1982 show.
On December 15, 1981, the Oregon
Circuit Court for Multnoman County
PLAY METER, july 1,1982
rendered a judgment of guilty of "promot-
ing gambling in the first degree against
Donald A. Anderson of A&A Amusement
Company of Portland. Anderson had just
finished a term on the board of directors
for the AM OA. He is currently on the
registration committee for the association.
Anderson was given a five year sus-
pended sentence and lost more than $5,000
in coins that had been confiscated with 120
games. The games, "after ensuring that the
devices are no longer illegal gambling
devices," were to be sold by the county,
states the court's decision.
In similar action, a lane County court
accepted a guilty plea from Steve Kraus of
Cigarette Service Inc. of Eugene. later,
Steve's brother, Jim, also pled guilty t~ the
gambli ng charges. Steve Kraus was given
a five year suspended sentence and fined
$2,000. Jim Kraus was also given a five year
suspended sentence but was fined just .
$1 ,000 when he turned state's evidence in a
case against John Langen, a source
reported.
Langen, owner of the El Dorado bar in
Eugene, was employing some of Jim
Kraus's card game videos at his location
but was also operating some games of his
own there and in other locations. Sources
told Play Meter that when Kraus and
Langen argued over whether or not Langen
should be operating his own games, the
melee led to the arrests of both men.
Langen is currently appealing the five
year suspended sentence and $10,000 fine
levied after his jury trial.
The Kraus brothers are AMOA mem-
bers, but Langen is not.
IGT SUES
BALLY
Si Redd 's International Game Technology
(IGT), the nation's most productive video
gambling equipment supplier, has filed suit
against Bally Manufacturing claiming
rights to all Bally/ Midway videos pro-
duced from 1975 to May 31 , 1983. Bally
has responded with counterclaims that
Redd has "improper ulterior motives" in
including the videos in a suit that is princi-
pally directed at Bally's new poker video
game.
Redd and lGT would like to keep the
Bally game out of the casinos in las Vegas
and to do so they are suing Bally in regard
to certain contracts between the two .
Redd, known as the "slot king," was
formerly president of Bally Distributing of
Nevada. He owned seventy percent of that
company's stock. Bally's chairman ,
William O'Donnell , owned the remaining
thirty percent.
In 1975, Bally wanted to make the dis-
tributing arm in Nevada a wholly owned
subsidiary and bought Redd out for some
cash and some considerations, one of
which was the rights to , according to the
contract as presented by an IGT attorney in
its complaint submitted to the 2nd District
Court in Nevada , "all coin-operated
gaming and amusement machines devel-
oped or under development by the corpo-
ration as of the date hereof."
Bally insists the "agreements are limited
to video gaming machines." The counter-
claims against IGT state that such limita-
tions were "expressed directly" by the
parties involved and that Redd's conduct
since the contract is proof that he has no
claim to video profits.
"Indeed," Bally's counterclaim reads,
"IGT and its predecessor companies had
purchased such video amusement games
from (Bally) and sold them to third parties
for several years without any claim that the
alleged agreements prohibited (Bally) from
manufacturing or distributing said games,
and without any claim to the profits there-
from."
Bally contends that only specific video
gambling machines were included in the
pact.
Depositions have been taken from
parties involved with the two companies
and their contractual relationships, and a
court hearing has been tentatively sched-
uled for sometime in July.
15