Amazon denies liability for social casino app, asks judge to drop lawsuit
Lawyers for Amazon responded last week to the company's naming in the proposed class-action lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges that the company conspired with social casino app developers to conduct what the plaintiffs say is essentially illegal gambling.
In November, Amazon was named as a defendant in a lawsuit challenging the approval of free social casino apps in the online marketplace. While games like Slotomania and Double Down Vegas Slots are free to play, players can purchase additional game credits once the initial allotment of spins is used up. They cannot recoup the money they spent to purchase the loan.
Nevada plaintiff Steve Horn claims he was addicted to social gaming apps and made more than 320 financial transactions using games downloaded from the Amazon App and Games store. In response to the lawsuit filed in the Western District of Washington, Amazon lawyers said the lawsuit should be dismissed. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) protects internet platforms from legal claims over third-party content.
Horn claims in the lawsuit that Amazon acted as a bank for the social casino app and helped facilitate the operation of "illegal slot machines."
KEEP PETITION
Amazon believes the social gaming lawsuit is meritless. But if the case isn't dismissed, lawyers representing the tech giant said the lawsuit should at least be put on hold pending similar lawsuits against Apple, Google and Meta's Facebook. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is expected to hear the cases in April or May, Reuters reported.
Because the Ninth Circuit’s ruling on the consolidated appeal either ends the case entirely or significantly simplifies the CDA exemption issue, Amazon respectfully requests that the court stay this litigation until the Ninth Circuit issues its opinion,” Amazon has filed Petition. “This will prevent the parties and the court from wasting resources on complex issues that the Ninth Circuit will soon resolve, and if disputes remain, the court will have the benefit of seeking guidance from the Ninth Circuit before proceeding. “The feasibility of Mr. Horn’s allegations was set out. "
Section 230 of the CDA “protects certain Internet-based actors from certain types of litigation.” The landmark case of Barnes v. Yahoo! In 2009, a case decided by the Ninth Circuit concluded that Internet service providers are not responsible for objectionable content posted by third parties on their websites or platforms.
CDA is not absolute
While the CDA provides legal protection to app stores, it does not protect companies that knowingly violate criminal laws.
Horn claimed that Amazon knowingly allowed illegal casino apps to enter its marketplace. The case centers on a 2018 Ninth Circuit ruling that found social gaming app Big Fish Casino constituted illegal online gambling.
Despite knowing that social casinos are illegal, Amazon continues to maintain a 30% financial interest in profits by arranging slot machines, attracting customers, and acting as a bank. "Horn's lawsuit states. "Accordingly, Amazon is liable as an illegal gambling enterprise and co-conspirator in the conspiracy. "
Social gaming apps are estimated to have generated more than $6 billion in revenue in the United States last year.
Read also:
- Football 101: What is relegation in football?
- Valley Forge casino player leaves baby alone in car
- Casino crime summary: Police kill gunman on casino garage parking ramp
- Macau shouts "Wow!" to horse racing and hosts final
Source: www.casino.org
