DraftKings, FanDuel, and NFL sued over microbetting
Table of contents
- A Pennsylvania lawsuit accuses DraftKings, FanDuel, the NFL, and Genius Sports of deliberately designing addictive microbetting products that stripped two plaintiffs of more than $2 million.
- The complaint, filed by the Public Health Advocacy Institute at Northeastern University, compares the platforms to slot machines and the defendants’ conduct to the tobacco industry’s playbook.
- The defendants have not publicly responded to the allegations.
Two Pennsylvania residents have filed a lawsuit in state court accusing DraftKings, FanDuel, the NFL, and data firm Genius Sports of engineering betting platforms designed to drive compulsive gambling through live in-game microbetting.
The complaint, filed this week on March 24, in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas is on behalf of plaintiffs Christopher Sage and Terry Thompson.
The case was brought by the Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) at Northeastern University’s law school, an organization with a track record of product liability litigation against the tobacco industry.
What the lawsuit claims
The complaint centres on microbetting, a format that allows players to wager on rapid in-game events as odds update in real time.
The filing describes these bets as placed on a “virtually limitless array of events” during a sporting contest, resolving within seconds and offering no natural pause between rounds.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs argue the apps became, in their words, “a relentless, always-on addiction-amplifying machine through a personalized and lightning-fast sports gambling interface unlike anything previously sold to gambling customers.”
The complaint compares the format directly to slot machines, arguing it creates the same cycle of continuous, rapid wagering with no off-ramps. According to the filing, live betting accounts for roughly 50% of handle on the DraftKings and FanDuel platforms.
The plaintiffs’ losses
Both men say they wagered without issue for years before transitioning to sportsbook apps. The complaint states their behavior escalated rapidly after doing so.
Terry Thompson is alleged to have lost approximately $1.52 million on FanDuel and $336,000 on DraftKings.
Christopher Sage lost around $130,300 on FanDuel and $40,000 on DraftKings. Combined losses across both plaintiffs exceed $2 million.
The filing also shows the role of VIP host programs. The complaint alleges hosts maintained direct contact with both men, offering luxury gifts, event tickets, and travel incentives to encourage continued betting. In one instance cited in the filing, Thompson’s host messaged him:
“[W]hat do we think about taking a timeout and enjoying the holidays with the family and starting fresh after the new year?”
Despite such messages, the lawsuit alleges hosts continued engaging users and offering promotions.
NFL and Genius Sports named
The inclusion of the NFL as a defendant is one of the more striking elements of the case. Genius Sports holds exclusive rights to distribute NFL data to sportsbooks, supplying the real-time statistics that power microbetting markets.
The complaint argues that without that data, sportsbooks “cannot implement microbetting.”
The NFL holds an equity stake in Genius Sports. The filing alleges both organizations facilitate and profit from microbetting through their supply of officially licensed real-time game data, and that this arrangement benefits them directly as high-frequency wagering generates substantial commission revenue.
Andrew Rainer, Litigation Director at PHAI, said:
“Instead of continuing to stuff their pockets with billions of dollars in annual revenues, the perpetrators of this devastation must be held to account.”
Rainer also said:
“Following in the footsteps of the tobacco industry, the online sports gambling industry has developed a highly addictive, difficult-to-resist product that bombards consumers with dozens of betting opportunities every minute of the day.”
The lawsuit raises claims including negligence, defective design, failure to warn, and unfair trade practices, and seeks damages, legal fees, and changes to the defendants’ practices. None of the defendants have publicly responded to the allegations.
What comes next
If the case advances to pretrial discovery, internal communications about what operators knew regarding their products’ addictive potential could become central evidence. That prospect alone may draw significant regulatory attention, particularly given the speed at which microbetting has grown as a share of total handle at the major US sportsbooks.
A successful outcome for the plaintiffs could reshape the conversation around live betting product design and operator duty of care across the US market.
Keep reading
Do you have a story worth sharing?
Send it over to our editors!
