A new lawsuit in Massachusetts claims DraftKings and FanDuel engineered their sportsbook apps to promote gambling addiction. Daniel Arroyo filed it in Suffolk Superior Court – just the second such case in one week. Courts have already dismissed similar claims before.
The apps are structured to shape user habits and encourage compulsive betting. So they use a “dangerously addictive design” that makes wagers effortless and always accessible. Personalized algorithms track behavior and keep users returning. The features are tuned to trigger repeat actions. You can place a bet without pause or hesitation. The system rewards constant activity instead of balanced play.
The lawsuit states:
Their gambling apps track every user interaction, including wagers placed, time spent on the app, and even moments of hesitation to create hyper-personalized algorithms. Utilizing this data, they bombard gamblers, including gamblers that know or should be problem gamblers, with targeted notifications and advertisements precisely when they’re most susceptible, like late at night or after a big loss.
Promotions and retention strategies are also a significant focus in the lawsuit. It talks about targeted offers and VIP style programs – targeted promotions and aggressive ‘VIP concierge programs’ – that are supposedly deliberately designed to raise betting frequency.
Rather than limiting potential harm, the filing claims operators actively reinforce risky behavior:
Refuse to implement any safeguards… instead, intentionally design their sports gambling platforms to addict users.
The case cites the Massachusetts consumer protection law to describe sportsbook apps as defective products. The argument is that the apps being always available, tailored content, and incentive-based systems are the factors that eventually result in driving the users to repeated betting. This lawsuit has been supported by the Public Health Advocacy Institute, which is also in support of other litigation filed in Pennsylvania just a day before. That legal action also names DraftKings and FanDuel as platforms that are essentially relentless, always-on addiction-amplifying machines.
Micro betting is seen as nonstop, with no breaks or pauses in the action, per the Pennsylvania lawsuit, which labels it a continuous cycle where players stay engaged without rest. The NFL and Genius Sports are named as the ones providing real-time data to power the betting features.
Massachusetts’ case reflects a broader legal shift focusing on how products are designed and how they keep users active. The plaintiffs who won a $6m jury award against Meta and Google in Los Angeles say those companies used similar tactics to trap users into prolonged engagement.
A federal judge in Pennsylvania rejected an addiction claim filed against DraftKings despite growing numbers of lawsuits. Some cases still fall short even as legal actions increase.
The court stated:
DraftKings has no duty of care to protect Plaintiffs from spending too much money or from developing or fueling a gambling addiction.
That case concerned roughly the same allegations as in this one, e. g. that the VIP employees were persuading the customers to bet their limits. However, the court did not see these points as valid and indicated that operators do not have power over a person’s behavior.
The judge added:
Encouraging them to place bets is insufficient to create a fiduciary relationship.
In essence, it argued that users have the ultimate decision on whether they want to place a bet or not, even if they get influenced by promotions or platform layout. The court ruling also mentioned that the very idea of sports betting is a personal choice of the user. Wearers of the betting cap are generally free not to make a decision or to follow the suggestions and guidance that can be given by the operators or VIP hosts.
