Apple, Google, Meta request on casino-style apps denied

The lawsuits seek unspecified compensatory and triple damages, among other remedies

A federal judge on Tuesday denied Apple, Google and Meta Platforms’ requests to dismiss lawsuits claiming they promoted illegal gambling by hosting and accepting commissions from casino-style apps that addict users.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila in San Jose, California, rejected the companies’ main argument that Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which protects online platforms from liability over third-party content, shielded them from the proposed class actions.

Davila dismissed some claims alleging violations of some U.S. state laws, but denied motions to dismiss all claims brought under consumer protection laws except in California.

Dozens of plaintiffs contended that Apple’s App Store, Google’s Play Store and Meta’s Facebook promoted an “authentic Vegas-style experience of slot machine gambling” through an illegal racketeering conspiracy.

By exploiting users, the defendants allegedly triggered depression, suicidal thoughts and other consequences, while brokering and collecting 30% commissions – estimated at more than $2 billion – on transactions they processed, the plaintiffs added.

The lawsuits seek unspecified compensatory and triple damages, among other remedies.

In a 37-page decision, Davila found that Apple, Google and Meta did not act as “publishers” when processing payments, undercutting their Section 230 immunity claims.

The District Judge called it irrelevant that the companies provided “neutral tools” to support the apps, and rejected a suggestion that the plaintiffs’ failure to label them “bookies” excused them from liability.

The crux of plaintiffs’ theory is that defendants improperly processed payments for social casino apps, Davila wrote. It is beside the point whether that activity turns defendants into bookies or brokers.