Tech Giants Apple, Google and Meta Face Legal Battle Over $2 Billion Casino App Commissions

The tech giants Apple, Google, and Meta are facing significant legal challenges as they allegedly earned over $2 billion in commissions from casino-style applications.

On Tuesday, a federal judge denied requests from Apple, Google, and Meta Platforms to dismiss lawsuits claiming these companies promoted illegal gambling by hosting and taking commissions from casino-style apps that create user addiction.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila in San Jose, California, rejected the companies' primary defense that Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which typically protects online platforms from liability for third-party content, shielded them from these proposed class actions.

While Judge Davila dismissed some claims related to violations of certain U.S. state laws, he denied motions to dismiss all claims brought under consumer protection laws except those in California.

Google, an Alphabet subsidiary, did not immediately comment on the ruling. Apple and Meta also did not provide immediate responses to requests for comment. Similarly, the plaintiffs' legal representatives have not yet responded to inquiries.

Dozens of plaintiffs have alleged that Apple's App Store, Google's Play Store, and Meta's Facebook promoted an "authentic Vegas-style experience of slot machine gambling" through what they describe as an illegal racketeering conspiracy.

The plaintiffs claim that by exploiting users, the defendants triggered serious consequences including depression and suicidal thoughts, while collecting 30% commissions—estimated to exceed $2 billion—on transactions they processed.

These lawsuits seek unspecified compensatory damages, triple damages, and other remedies.

Judge Davila emphasized the importance of these issues by allowing immediate appeals.

In his 37-page decision, Davila determined that Apple, Google, and Meta were not acting as "publishers" when processing payments, which undermined their Section 230 immunity claims.

He noted that it was irrelevant that the companies provided "neutral tools" to support the apps and rejected the suggestion that the plaintiffs' failure to specifically label them as "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."

Davila stated that Apple, Google, and Meta may immediately appeal his decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, partly due to the significance of the Section 230 issues involved.

The 9th Circuit had previously dismissed earlier appeals in May 2024, stating it lacked jurisdiction at that time. The litigation against these Silicon Valley companies began in 2021.

The cases in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, are In re Apple Inc App Store Simulated Casino-Style Games Litigation, No. 21-md-02985; In re Google Play Store Simulated Casino-Style Games Litigation, No. 21-md-03001; and In re Facebook Simulated Casino-Style Games Litigation, No. 21-02777.