Content on this page may include affiliate links. If you click and sign up/place a wager, we may receive compensation at no cost to you.
Apple, Google, Meta Illegal Gambling Lawsuit Moves to Next Stage
A lawsuit alleging that Big Tech companies Apple, Google, and Meta have profited from illegal online casino play is moving forward.
An illegal gambling lawsuit against Apple, Google, and Meta will proceed after a federal judge only partially granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the case on Sept. 30. The litigation could change US residents' access to online casino games and marketing for online casino bonuses.
Judge allows claim over tech companies' revenue from casino apps to continue
US District Court Judge Edward Davila issued his decision on the trio of defendants' motion to dismiss the case against them, mostly granting the request. However, Davila allowed a significant part of the claim against Apple, Google, and Meta to survive.
That claim alleges that the three companies violated federal law and the laws of multiple states by collecting revenue from platforming illegal online gambling apps and websites. In response to those allegations, the trio of defendants argued that Section 230 of the US code protects their business interests in that regard.
What is Section 230 and why does it matter in this lawsuit?
Section 230 is a law that provides limited immunity from prosecution on the federal level for providers of online platforms like those that Apple, Google, and Meta operate. The US government considers these companies intermediaries giving users access to content rather than the purveyors of the content.
Apple, Google, and Meta invoked Section 230 in their motions to dismiss. Their argument was that the lawsuit against them fails to state a legitimate claim because Section 230 gives them cover.
However, Davila only partially agreed with that argument. Davila countered that precedent regarding Section 230 only protects the defendants in terms of providing access to the content, not to their collecting revenue from the promotion of content.
In other words, Section 230 provides cover for Meta if DraftKings Casino runs an ad that violates responsible gambling laws. However, it doesn't cover financial transactions between Google and Golden Nugget Casino, for example.
Although Davila's order preserves that claim, it could still be years before Apple, Google, or Meta have to make substantial changes to how they treat gambling content on their apps and websites.
Appeals process could take complaint to the US Supreme Court
As of Oct. 1, none of the three defendants have appealed Davila's orders on the motion to dismiss. The next stage for this motion would be the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Assuming the Ninth does not overturn Davila's order, the option to appeal to the US Supreme Court would remain. Should Davila's order survive, the litigation on the merits of the surviving claim could begin.
That litigation process in federal courts could add years to the time it takes to reach a resolution. Additionally, Section 230 includes a clause that states it doesn't preempt claims against companies like Apple, Google, and Meta in state courts.
Because of Davila's order, the litigation is a little closer to a final resolution. The focus of Apple's, Google's, and Meta's attorneys will now turn to the Ninth Circuit.
