A U.S. federal judge has rejected attempts by Apple, Google, and Meta to dismiss a series of class action lawsuits accusing them of promoting illegal gambling through their platforms. The decision, issued Tuesday by District Judge Edward Davila in San Jose, means the tech giants must now continue to defend themselves in a case that could shape how U.S. law treats platform liability in the digital era.
Judge rejects Section 230 defense
The lawsuits claim that Apple’s App Store, Google’s Play Store, and Meta’s Facebook hosted and profited from casino-style apps that function as illegal gambling operations. Users, the suits argue, were lured into spending large sums on virtual slot machines and similar games, with the companies collecting up to 30% in commissions on those transactions.
Don’t miss the best of The Mac Observer
Set us as a preferred source and our Apple reporting ranks higher in your Google Search results and Discover feed — one tap, no account changes.
Reuters reports that Judge Davila dismissed some state-level claims but allowed key allegations under consumer protection laws to proceed, except those brought under California statutes. Central to the companies’ defense was Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a federal law that shields online platforms from liability for third-party content. Davila rejected that argument, ruling that Apple, Google, and Meta were not acting as “publishers” when they processed payments for these apps.
“The crux of plaintiffs’ theory is that defendants improperly processed payments for social casino apps,” Davila wrote in his 37-page decision. “It is beside the point whether that activity turns defendants into bookies or brokers.”
Billions at stake as legal fight escalates
The class actions, some of which date back to 2020, allege that the companies were part of an “illegal racketeering conspiracy” designed to simulate a “Vegas-style” gambling experience. According to plaintiffs, the apps have triggered depression, suicidal thoughts, and financial losses for users, while generating billions in revenue for the platforms.
The suits seek compensatory and triple damages, as well as other remedies. Lawyers representing the plaintiffs argue that the companies exploited vulnerable users and knowingly facilitated addictive gambling behavior. None of the three companies has responded publicly to the ruling, and the plaintiffs’ legal team has also declined to comment.
Appeal likely, but past rulings offer little comfort
While the ruling represents a significant setback for Apple, Google, and Meta, Davila acknowledged the broader legal implications of the case and allowed the companies to pursue an immediate appeal. They are now expected to bring the matter before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
That court previously dismissed similar appeals in May 2024, citing a lack of jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court also declined to weigh in on Section 230 issues in 2020. But with billions of dollars in potential damages and questions over the limits of platform immunity at stake, this case is likely to become a major test of how courts interpret tech companies’ responsibilities in managing digital marketplaces.
For now, the lawsuits remain active, and one of Silicon Valley’s longest-running legal battles over online gambling and platform accountability is far from over.
Discussion