Mitchell v. Skillz Platform Inc., 2026 WL 2212876, No.
26-cv-00674-AMO (N.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2026)
Although competitors can aggregate harm to sue under the Lanham
Act, consumers—the direct victims of false advertising—tend to have more
trouble. Skillz
just lost a big claim to its main competitor over falsely advertising that
it didn’t use bots in mobile cash games. Here, with similar allegations under
various state laws, the consumers struck out. Plaintiffs didn’t sufficiently
allege reliance, causation, or lack of an adequate remedy at law (for the
restitution claim).
Representations that users match with “real players” and
have “no bots guaranteed” were plausibly false and deceptive, as were representations
that users match with “players of equal skill.” But the representation that
users can make “easy withdrawals” was non-actionable puffery with no set
meaning.
The claims failed because plaintiffs didn’t allege that they
relied on or even read any particular representation. “Most of the
representations are allegedly located across Skillz’s website and social media
accounts, so it is not reasonable to infer that Plaintiffs must have seen them.”
Even an in-app badge displayed “in front of every single player, every time
they launch a Skillz-powered application” since at least the beginning of 2024
wasn’t enough to plead that they actually read the alleged misrepresentations. Seems
pretty fixable, but language quoted rejecting the RICO claim was bad news (and
maybe another reason to avoid RICO claims): “[A]s the Ninth Circuit noted in a
similar case, ‘there may be no single, logical explanation for gambling—it may
be an addiction, a form of escape, a casual endeavor, a hobby, a risk-taking
money venture, or scores of other things.’ As a result, it may well be that the
representations ‘did nothing to influence [users’] perceptions’ or that users ‘played
fully aware of how the [platform] operate[s].’” While the evidence in the
competitor case tends to negate that idea, “users had to launch a Skillz
application before seeing the in-app badge, so they might have already decided
to play before seeing the representations at issue here.”
No comments:
Post a Comment