Amazon Denies Liability Over Social Casino Apps

By Jerry Smith Staff Writer Updated: 01/20/2024

Jerry Smith Staff Writer See Full Bio

Jerry’s greatest advantage is his extensive experience on the casino floor. His time as a casino manager taught him everything about what makes a player tick. Besides being a skilled poker player, he has deep knowledge of all live table games and gambling regulations in the US.

Twitter X

Social Casino Apps

It has been reported that Amazon is seeking to dismiss a class-action lawsuit implicating it in facilitating what plaintiffs describe as illegal gambling operations via social casino apps. The case was filed in the Western District of Washington and has put a spotlight on the connection between technology, law, and consumer protection.

The lawsuit was started by Nevada resident Steve Horn, and it highlights Amazon’s role in hosting and allegedly profiting from social casino apps like Slotomania and Double Down Vegas Slots.

These apps, which are available for free, offer players the option to buy additional credits once their initial free spins have run out. The purchased credits cannot be converted back into real money, a fact that is key to the ongoing legal debate.

Addiction to Games

Horn admitted that he had developed an addiction to these games, and he argued that Amazon’s involvement went beyond just hosting the games. He claims that the company essentially acted as a financial intermediary, enabling transactions for games he describes as illegal slots. Horn claims to have made more than 320 financial transactions through Amazon’s Apps & Games Store.

In response, Amazon’s attorneys are arguing for dismissal, citing Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act (CDA) of 1996. This legislation provides a layer of immunity to internet platforms from legal claims concerning third-party content. Amazon claims that as a platform host, it should not be held accountable for the content or activities of the apps it offers.

In addition, it has been reported that Amazon’s legal team is pushing for a stay in the proceedings. This request is based on claims that the outcome of similar lawsuits against other tech giants like Apple, Google, and Meta’s Facebook should first be resolved.

These cases, expected to be heard by the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in the coming months, will have a big impact on Amazon’s situation. In its petition, Amazon stated:

Because the Ninth Circuit’s resolution of the consolidated appeal will either foreclose this case entirely or substantially simplify the threshold CDA immunity issue, Amazon respectfully requests that the Court stay this action until the Ninth Circuit issues its opinion.

Another similar case, the 2009 Barnes v. Yahoo! case, concluded that internet service providers are generally not liable for objectionable content posted by third parties. However, the CDA’s protections are not set in stone, and they do not extend to platforms that knowingly violate criminal law.

The 2018 Ninth Circuit Ruling

The basis of the lawsuit against Amazon hinges on a 2018 Ninth Circuit ruling that found the social gaming app Big Fish Casino constituted illegal online gambling. Horn’s lawsuit makes comparisons to this, claiming that Amazon knowingly allowed similar illegal casino apps on its marketplace.

As a result of the legal action, questions have arisen about the responsibilities of digital marketplaces in monitoring and regulating the content and services they offer. The outcome of this case could have huge implications for how tech companies manage third-party content such as this.