Fife v. Scientific Games Corp.

Scientific Games Corporation (Scientific) (defendant) marketed mobile apps that allowed users to play gambling games. Scientific’s apps provided users with initial free allotments of 6,000,000 “virtual coins” to play the games. Each turn in the games required betting at least 48,000 coins. Users could obtain more free coins through periodic in-app bonuses. Additionally, once a user’s coin balance dropped too low to continue playing, the user received a pop-up screen with options to buy coins. Sheryl Fife (plaintiff) used Scientific’s Jackpot Party Casino app and purchased coins that Fife then lost playing in the app. Fife brought a class-action lawsuit against Scientific to recover the money spent on the coins, asserting that the games in Scientific’s apps constituted illegal gambling under Washington law. The statute defined gambling to include staking something of value on the outcome of a chance-based contest. Scientific moved to dismiss, arguing that its apps did not involve gambling because users were not staking any “thing of value” on the games’ outcomes. The statutory definition of “thing of value” included the opportunity to play for free a game that would otherwise cost money. Scientific argued that the definition did not apply to Scientific’s apps because Scientific’s games were free to play, given the free coin allotments. Scientific further asserted that its apps were exempt from the gambling prohibition because users’ in-app coin purchases were purchases for an amusement game, which Scientific claimed fell within a statutory exception for bona fide business transactions.