\n Posted on: February 11, 2024, 10:11h.\u00a0\n <\/p>\n
\n Last updated on: February 11, 2024, 10:11h.\n <\/p>\n
![\"Avatar](\"https:\/\/www.casino.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/cropped-4-1-50x50.png\")
<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\nSkillz, a skill mobile gaming platform that facilitates real money wagering amongst peer-to-peer players, was awarded $42.89 million on Friday after succeeding in its legal claims that rival AviaGames infringed on its patented protected platform.<\/p>\n A jury in San Jose, Ca., concluded that AviaGames, after partnering with Skillz to leverage its platform in a business-to-business arrangement, essentially stole the technology and modified it to its financial advantage. A juror speaking on anonymity with Casino.org <\/i>disclosed the jury was in agreement when handed the case that Avia games willfully breached Skillz\u2019s patent<\/a>.<\/p>\n The jury awarded us $42.9 million and found willful infringement. We\u2019re very pleased with the verdict. It\u2019s a step in the right direction to promoting fairness in our industry,\u201d said Andrew Dahlinghaus, general counsel of Skillz.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The juror speaking with Casino.org <\/i>said the jury found AviaGames CEO Vickie Chen to be morally dishonest. The 22-year-old man, the youngest on the jury, said the group of 12 believed Chen and Avia \u201cacted in bad faith.\u201d<\/p>\n AviaGames executives claimed the company had not cloned Skillz\u2019s platform in developing its Pocket7Games app that the plaintiffs alleged was a \u201ccopycat\u201d and \u201cknockoff\u201d of its software development kit (SDK).<\/p>\n The juror told me during an interview on Saturday that Chen and other Avia execs\u2019 testimony wasn\u2019t convincing. The juror also took issue with Chen not taking the stand in the San Jose federal courtroom<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n Instead, Chen\u2019s previously recorded disposition was played in court off the record for the jury. Avia has an office in Mountain View where its platform operates, but many of Avia\u2019s C-suite personnel, including Chen, are based in China.<\/p>\n In a separate class-action lawsuit, Avia is accused of using computer bots to play against human players. The bots, the plaintiffs argue, allow the Avia platform to quickly pair a real human player in a head-to-head cash game. Skillz customers during non-peak periods can face lengthy wait times before being matched.<\/p>\n Skillz\u2019s patent involves the technology pairing like-skilled players. Avia said it had developed a technology called \u201chistorical playthroughs\u201d that allowed competing players to play at different times. Skillz attorneys said Avia\u2019s internal communications<\/a> regularly referenced the use of bots through the code words \u201cCucumbers\u201d and \u201cGuides.\u201d<\/p>\n The jury believed the \u201chistorical playthrough\u201d term was developed solely for Avia\u2019s legal defense and that it was likely that computer bots were indeed used. Though the jury was not tasked with reaching a verdict on the bot element, the group reasoned that their presence was further proof that Avia violated the Skillz patent to create an unfair, illegal playing field between the two competitors.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n While the jury was in agreement that Avia was guilty of patent infringement, the juror said the financial award wasn\u2019t as clear among the 12. After over eight hours of deliberations, the jury told Judge Beth Labson Freeman that it arrived at an award of $42,899,274.<\/p>\n AviaGames could appeal the Skillz<\/a> verdict, but that presumably won\u2019t be the company\u2019s last day in court in its defense of Skillz\u2019s claims<\/a> now proven factual by a federal jury. With the jury finding AviaGames in the wrong, the proposed class-action lawsuit brought by consumers who played Avia\u2019s games will proceed.<\/p>\n Also filed in the US Northern District of California, the consumer lawsuit claims Avia deceived players by using computer bots in what was an illegal gambling operation.<\/p>\n Instead of being games of skill as advertised, Avia\u2019s games are manipulated games of chance that amount to an unapproved gambling enterprise,\u201d the class-action litigation alleges. \u201cThis action seeks to hold Defendants responsible for their deceptive practices and, separately, their racketeering gambling enterprise.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The attorneys representing the lead plaintiffs \u2014 former Avia players Andrew Pandolfi and Mandi Shawcroft \u2014 say the \u201cclass is so numerous that a joinder of all members \u2026 is impracticable.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThere are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of geographically dispersed Class members,\u201d read the class action complaint. \u201cThe Class members can be readily identified and notified in an administratively feasible manner using, among other information, Defendants\u2019 own electronic transactional records.\u201d<\/p>\n The lawsuit means if you are an Avia customer wanting to join the lawsuit, you will likely be notified by mail of your ability to join.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"Skillz](\"https:\/\/www.casino.org\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/20180514-us-district-court-northern-california-san-jose-04-858x572.jpg\")
\n
Defenseless Defense<\/b><\/h2>\n
Avia Legal Defense Only Beginning<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n