epprovmolurinor.netlify.com

In April 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Double Down Interactive and International Game Technology for allegedly misleadingly representing that its online casino games are free to play when, according to the plaintiffs, consumers need chips to play the games and, after they use all of the free chips given to first time visitors, they must purchase additional chips to play the games. Plaintiffs also.

1. A class-action lawsuit against DoubleDown social casino was dismissed in March. The suit charged that the social casino—by selling virtual chips for social casino games—was conducting illegal gambling under Illinois law by a player in that state. The court ruled that since the purchased chips can never be cashed in, DoubleDown had no stake in the outcome the player received on her play.
2. Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

An Illinois court has ruled that since social casinos have no stake in whether players win or lose when they sell virtual chips, they are not offering gambling.

The ruling came in March when IGT’s DoubleDown multiplatform social casino site was named in a class action suit by an Illinois customer who claimed that the free gaming platform offers “nothing more than camouflaged unlawful games of chance.”

Playtika Settlement

The plaintiff lost about $1,000 in purchased chips and was seeking to recover them under the state’s Loss recovery Act, which allows gamblers to sue to recover losses from illegal games.

However, the suit was dismissed as the court ruled that since the virtual chips can never be cashed in—whether the player wins or loses—DoubleDown has no stake in the outcome of the games and therefore is not offering gambling.

Doubledown Casino Lawsuit

Social casino offer many free virtual chips to players, but also allow players to buy more chips, even though they have no monetary value. Players have been willing to buy these chips, even though they can’t recoup them, making social casino games very lucrative.

The court ruled that the only risk the casino ran was losing the plaintiff’s business.