In April 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Double Down Interactive and International Game Technology for allegedly misleadingly representing that its online casino games are free to play when, according to the plaintiffs, consumers need chips to play the games and, after they use all of the free chips given to first time visitors, they must purchase additional chips to play the games. Plaintiffs also. Doubledown casino cheatsJust drop not only cash prizes, but also free doubledown casino cheats spins.

• Support Doubledown Casino Complaints
• Slotomania Lawsuit

With millions of players DoubleDown Casino is the best free casino where you can enjoy a variety of games including over 30+ free slots, slot tournaments, multi-player poker, video poker, bingo,. Information about Double Down Casino was first submitted to Scambook on May 04, 2014. Since then the page has accumulated 8 consumer complaints. On average users reported $254584.63 of damages. Scambook's investigation team reached out to this company a total of 6 times, Scambook Investigators last contacted them on Dec 26, 2012.

An Illinois court has ruled that since social casinos have no stake in whether players win or lose when they sell virtual chips, they are not offering gambling.

The ruling came in March when IGT’s DoubleDown multiplatform social casino site was named in a class action suit by an Illinois customer who claimed that the free gaming platform offers “nothing more than camouflaged unlawful games of chance.”

The plaintiff lost about $1,000 in purchased chips and was seeking to recover them under the state’s Loss recovery Act, which allows gamblers to sue to recover losses from illegal games.

However, the suit was dismissed as the court ruled that since the virtual chips can never be cashed in—whether the player wins or loses—DoubleDown has no stake in the outcome of the games and therefore is not offering gambling.

Social casino offer many free virtual chips to players, but also allow players to buy more chips, even though they have no monetary value. Players have been willing to buy these chips, even though they can’t recoup them, making social casino games very lucrative.

The court ruled that the only risk the casino ran was losing the plaintiff’s business.

Share this article

A handful of lawmakers in Washington state have put forth legislation aimed at preventing class-action lawsuits against video game companies. Two similar bills have been put forward in the state's Senate and House of Representatives this month that would change the legal definition of 'illegal gambling games' to carve out an exception for video games.

Both pieces of legislation would add a sentence to existing gambling law stating, 'For purposes of this section, 'illegal gambling games' does not include online games of chance when played solely for entertainment purposes with virtual items if such virtual items may be used only for gameplay and may not be, per the terms of service of the game, transferred, exchanged, or redeemed for money or property.'

The justification for the change is spelled out in each bill as an attempt to protect the state's gaming businesses from lawsuits after two companies based in Washington had class-action lawsuits filed against them. The law doesn't spell out which companies, but it would presumably be the social casino outfits Big Fish Games and Double Down Interactive, both of which have been named in class action complaints since a 2018 court ruling that Big Fish Games' Big Fish Casino qualified as illegal gambling because its virtual currency counted as a 'thing of value.'

While the new legislation deals with the ability of players to cash out virtual items for real-world money, it does not directly reference the primary reason Big Fish Casino was deemed to be illegal in the first place. The judge in the 2018 ruling specifically said the ability to cash out was not the determining factor in virtual currency having value. Instead, the reason Big Fish Casino chips qualified as things of value was how they extended users' privilege of playing the games with more wagers or spins on a slot machine.

The two pieces of pending legislation -- House Bill 2720 and Senate Bill 6568 -- both have bipartisan support, with Democrats and Republicans sponsoring the measures. Both bills are also clear in that their motivation is to protect Washington-based businesses from consumer legal action.

As the legislators wrote in the text of House Bill 2720, 'These lawsuits, if decided adversely to the game companies, pose a substantial financial risk for video game development in this state. The further possibility exists that companies based in Washington will move their base of operations to other states, which would remove thousands of jobs from the state and a currently incalculable, but materially significant, amount of tax dollars.

'Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature to remove this economic uncertainty by clarifying that a player is not entitled to recovery under RCW 4.24.070 unless the video game played provides a mechanism for the withdrawal of money or property from the game.'

Support Doubledown Casino Complaints

Slotomania Lawsuit

The introduction of the bills comes a month after the formation of the Game On WA coalition, a group advocating for free-to-play and social game developers that warns the state legislature must act or else gambling concerns around social games 'could mean game over for a vibrant and growing industry in this state.' Game On WA is co-chaired by former Washington governor Gary Locke, Washington Technology Industry Association CEO Michael Schutzler, and Kristina Hudson, executive director of the OneRedmond economic development group.