What changed in the last year, according to the documents themselves
The BitStarz bonus terms carry the line Last updated: June 25th 2025 and were read on 2 September 2026. That is 434 days in which the document claims no change at all — which is an answer, and a weaker one than it looks.
Somebody asking what changed in the last year wants two readings of the same document, taken twelve months apart, with the differences listed. Almost nobody has that, this site included, and pretending otherwise is how comparison pages end up describing a casino that stopped existing in that form some time ago.
What can be done instead is to date everything and print the distances.
Four hundred and thirty-four days
The BitStarz bonus terms open with the line Last updated: June 25th 2025. They were read end to end on 2 September 2026. That gap is 434 days, and inside it the document claims no change.
That is a real answer to the question, and its weakness should be stated in the same breath. A date line is written by the same party that writes the clauses. An edit that leaves the line alone leaves no evidence behind, and nothing in a self-published file corroborates its own timestamp.
So the honest form of the finding is this: on the evidence of the document itself, the forty times of clause 3.4, the 5 EUR ceiling of clause 3.10 and the seven-day clock of clause 3.7 stood unchanged across the period, and the file weighs 15,145 characters, with the general terms alongside it at 42,876.
One reading proves a state. Two readings prove a change.
Why one reading cannot answer the question
This desk holds a single dated reading for almost every operator here, which makes the question of movement unanswerable for them by construction rather than by oversight.
There is one exception, and it is instructive. The Vave row on this site was read on 25 August 2026 and produced one company name with no permit number, the register search that day having been made from the brand and come back empty. It was read again on 2 September 2026 and produced Latcas B.V. and the number OGL/2024/1676/0905, with the register entry resolving that day.
Eight days, two answers. Both are printed with their dates and neither is quietly dropped.
That single pair is the entire evidence this site holds about anything moving, and it moved at the level of the company on the licence rather than in a bonus clause.
Twenty-three codes, one reading day
Twenty-three codes are printed here, and every one of them rests on a page that answered a live request on 2 September 2026 — Bets.io and Mirax Casino, specifically. There is no older figure hiding among them, because this site does not print a code from a page it has not itself opened.
| Source | Read | Result |
|---|---|---|
| BitStarz bonus terms, self-dated | 25 June 2025 | read live 2 September 2026, no code |
| Bets.io bonus terms | 2 September 2026 | 15 codes |
| Mirax bonus terms | 2 September 2026 | 8 codes |
| Bitkingz's own domain | attempted 2 September 2026 | refused, no code printed |
| 7BitCasino's own domain | attempted 2 September 2026 | refused, no code printed |
| Oshi Casino's own domain | attempted 2 September 2026 | refused, no code printed |
The bottom three rows are the ones worth dwelling on. Bitkingz, 7BitCasino and Oshi Casino each publish codes of their own, and each domain refused every path tried from this desk's connection on 2 September 2026. Older copies of those pages exist elsewhere on the web; this site does not read from them, so the row stays empty rather than getting filled from a source this desk did not check itself. The Bitkingz page, the 7Bit Casino page and the Oshi Casino page each set out what happened in full.
What did change, and what a permit number dates
One thing about this operator can be placed in time with a document that it did not write: the permit.
The number printed is OGL/2024/165/0185, in the 2024 series of the Curaçao Gaming Authority, held by Gareton B.V., and the register entry resolved on 26 August 2026 showing the status Active. A series number dates paperwork. It does not date a bonus clause, and treating the two as one reading is the commonest way a page about change goes wrong.
The register also demonstrates that these entries do move. Across the wider library of a hundred operators, five brands carry a permit the register reports as revoked, one of them among the eleven compared on this site. A status that reads revoked today read otherwise when it was issued, and the date the change happened is not in what was read.
What a year does to a code
A clause and a code age differently, and the difference decides how much weight each carries.
A clause is the general rule of a contract, and a general rule that has stood for 434 days is reasonably likely to stand for another week. A code is an instrument attached to a campaign, and campaigns are the fastest-moving thing an operator publishes. That is exactly why this site will not print a code from a page it has not itself opened on the reading day: a string somebody else saved from an earlier date is evidence about that earlier date, not about today, and this site would rather leave a cell empty than dress an old finding up as a current one.
That is why every code here is printed with the date of the page it came from rather than with a claim about whether it still works. Testing a code means holding an account and entering it, and that is not the kind of source this site is built on.
Which produces a plain reading order for anybody using these pages. Take the clause figures as the durable part, and take the codes as dated observations tied to one specific reading day, 2 September 2026. Where a page would not open on that day — Bitkingz, 7BitCasino and Oshi Casino all refused the request — no code is printed at all rather than one carried forward from somewhere else.
What a reader can do that this site cannot
Keep a copy.
Before depositing on the strength of a printed offer, save the page — the promotion, and the bonus terms it points at — with the date visible. A screenshot is enough. Then, if the terms are ever quoted back at a payout, the version that was in force is a file rather than a memory.
That habit costs about a minute, and it is a record for that one reader alone. It is not something this site substitutes for its own reading: a page has to open for this desk on the day stated before anything from it gets printed here.
Everything printed here carries a date for the same reason, and the rule that decides what earns a place is on the source rule. The clauses this article dates are quoted as printed on the BitStarz reading.