Betting application Fliff confronts a $5 million class-action lawsuit
In a recent development, a California man named Bishoy Nessim Bishoy has filed a proposed class action lawsuit against Fliff Inc., a social sportsbook app that allows users to play with virtual coins and offers cash prizes. The lawsuit, which was filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleges that the app violates the Wire Act, California Unfair Competition Law, and anti-bookmaking laws.
Bishoy claims he lost over $7,000 using the app and seeks more than $5 million in damages for himself and others affected. The 18-page complaint focuses on the similarities between Fliff and real-money sportsbooks, arguing that the app's "free-to-play" model is a lure to attract consumers and then switch them to playing with real money.
This is not the first instance of a lawsuit against a sports betting app for alleged illegal activities; similar lawsuits have been filed against other companies in the past. The filing of the California lawsuit could potentially encourage other class actions against sweepstakes model casinos.
Despite the ongoing legal battle, it's important to note that Fliff does not offer traditional real-money sports betting and thus does not require a standard sportsbook license. Instead, it complies with sweepstakes laws, which are generally legal in most U.S. states. However, the app is under scrutiny in Ohio and other states for resembling online sportsbooks.
In Ohio, Fliff has stopped taking money while regulators look into the matter. The app is available in 49 states, excluding Washington. Certain states (Nevada, Tennessee, Idaho, Hawaii, Washington) restrict the use of Fliff Sweepstakes Coins, but this is due to individual state laws and Fliff’s own terms, not because of investigations or allegations of illegal activity.
Dennis Stewart, a former trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division, represents Bishoy in the lawsuit. Fliff has until June 28 to respond to the complaint.
The Wire Act argument is a significant part of the California complaint against Fliff. The lawsuit seeks an injunction to stop Fliff Inc. from offering its sports contests across state lines, allegedly in violation of the federal Wire Act. Sports betting is legal in Ohio and more than half of US States, but the specific legality of Fliff's model remains a topic of debate.
Sources:
- Fliff Sweepstakes
- Fliff Sweepstakes Legal Status
- Fliff Sweepstakes Terms
- Fliff Sweepstakes and Gambling Laws
- Arizona Department of Gaming Regulatory Action
- The lawsuit filed against Fliff Inc. by Bishoy Nessim Bishoy raises concerns about the intersection of sports, politics, and general-news, as it questions the legalities of sports-betting through a social sportsbook app.
- The ongoing legal battle surrounding Fliff Inc. raises questions about the distinction between general-news and sports-betting, especially in the context of sweepstakes-compliant apps offering cash prizes.
