Share
US District Judge Denise Cote overruled Papaya Gaming’s proposal to dismiss the lawsuit against it by its competitor, Skillz.
In the lawsuit filed in federal court in New York, Skillz had previously accused Papaya of deceiving its players by using computer bots in skill-based games against human customers. Papaya indicated that its real-money contests were player-vs.-player.
Skillz argues Papaya’s misleading ads may have attracted some players who would have played on Skillz. Papaya’s counterargument is that Skillz can’t prove it.
Key takeaways
- Skillz sued Israeli-based Papaya Gaming in March for tricking players using bots in skill-based games.
- According to the article by Bonus.com, Papaya denied these accusations, saying Skillz can’t demonstrate harm by any of Papaya’s allegedly misleading marketing.
- Papaya isn’t the only rival Skillz has accused of botting in a lawsuit after a suit against AviaGames.
- Skill games are surrounded by controversy or outright banned in some states, similarly facing opposition are online casinos.
Judge states Skillz’ accusations can be misleading
US District Judge Cote rejected that argument explaining that implied accusations can be misleading:
“The complaint sufficiently alleges that Papaya’s representations about the nature of its games are impliedly false. The complaint plausibly alleges that Papaya employs bots as “player”’ in its competitions while creating the impression that all players will be human competitors.
Its references to ‘players,’ ‘individuals,’ ‘winners,’ ‘fair’ and ‘skill-based’ may be found by a jury to imply that Papaya’s games of competition are conducted among human players only and not among humans and bots[…]
While a false denial about the use of bots would be actionable, it is not the only way in which a consumer may be misled. The plaintiff has adequately pleaded falsity from the statements that Papaya did make.”
It will now be up to a jury to decide whether Papaya’s ads were deceptive
Papaya denies allegations and says they will defend ‘baseless claims’
Papaya told Bonus.com that the company commits to “fair and enjoyable skills-based mobile gaming” that rewards the abilities of its players.
The company said:
“Papaya continues to believe that the complaint filed by Skillz is meritless and will vigorously defend against any and all baseless claims while remaining focused on our mission.”
Skillz and Papaya have similar products that influence players to compete against one another in games of skill while aiming to win the prize. What makes them different, however, is that Skillz produces only the platform, while Papaya makes their games in-house.
Papaya isn’t the only company that Skillz has accused of botting
The first case was a patent violation lawsuit. It surfaced similar evidence of using bots in skill-based human games that Skillz filed against AviaGames.
The case ended in victory for Skillz, as the federal jury in California’s Northern District Court ruled in favor of Skillz, awarding it nearly $43 million. There is a separate class-action suit on allegations that Avia utilizes bots, which is ongoing.
Earlier this month, Skillz sued Voodoo, a French video game developer, for falsely advertising and manipulating its platform with bots. Skillz claimed the company harmed its market share.
