“In this appeal, we consider whether the virtual game platform ‘Big Fish Casino’ constitutes I illegal gambling under Washington law. Ninth Circuit Judge Milan Smith wrote in the opinion:
#Carbon poker site down free
According to the Ninth Circuit, Big Fish Casino’s play-money chips do actually represent “something of value” because they can be traded on a secondary market and because players must buy more virtual chips when they run out of the original free chips they are given. The Ninth Circuit court of appeals stepped in and reversed the lower court’s ruling in March. In 2015, the US District Court for the Western District of Washington dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that Big Fish Casino clearly stated in its terms and conditions that virtual chips had no value and could not be redeemed for cash or merchandise. The woman who initiated the lawsuit argued that the chips did constitute something of value because they could be used to extend playtime and could even be exchanged for money on a secondary market. State law defines gambling as “staking or risking something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under the person’s control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that the person or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.” Although Big Fish Casino does not offer real money gambling, the lawsuit contended it is an illegal gambling operation under Washington gambling law. Washington’s Recovery of Money Lost at Gambling Act allows people who lose money to an illegal gambling operation to sue to recover that money. She later initiated a class action lawsuit against Churchill Downs Incorporated (which owns and operates Big Fish Casino) under the Recovery of Money Lost at Gambling Act. The court case that led to PokerStars’ decision dates back to 2015 and involves a Washington woman who spent more than $1,000 on play-money chips on social gambling app Big Fish Casino. PokerStars made the decision to suspend free-play games for Washington players in response to a Ninth Circuit appeals court ruling that found an unrelated social games provider in violation of state gambling laws for its use of virtual casino chips. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling may make life difficult for gaming platforms across the country. Washington State’s gaming laws have always been a little hardline, but its definition of “gambling” is similar to the definition in other states.
More concerning is the impact this ruling could have on social gaming apps in other states. The basis for this decision and the court case that led to it serves as a reminder that the expansion of online poker and sports betting will not always be a smooth ride in the USA. Casual poker players in Washington State woke up to a rude surprise earlier this month when they found out PokerStars has disabled all play-money games for users based in Washington.