The social games developer was acquired by Australian slots manufacturer Aristocrat in January 2018 - three months before the court’s ruling - for almost $1 billion. The new suit names Big Fish’s former owner, Churchill Downs, and new owner, Aristocrat Technologies, as defendants. The state defines gambling as “risking something of value on the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under the person’s control or influence to receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.” Big Fish to Fry? The play-money site was hit by several similar lawsuits last year after a federal court in Seattle ruled that the virtual chips used in Big Fish’s casino games could be considered to be “something of value,” which meant they could be defined as gambling under Washington State law. Seattle-based social casino Big Fish is facing a fresh class-action lawsuit that accuses it of operating “illegal online casino games.” A federal court appeals court in Washington State ruled last year that Big Fish social casino offered illegal gambling, prompting a slew of consumer lawsuits.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |