Evolution has named Playtech as the company behind an investigation report that has been described by the online casino games provider as a “defamatory smear campaign”.
Playtech Software Limited (PTS), a subsidiary of Playtech, was labelled by Evolution as the company accountable for commissioning the independent business intelligence firm Black Cube to investigate the provider’s activities in prohibited and sanctioned markets as well as its supply to unlicensed operators in regulated markets.
The accusation coincides with a New Jersey Superior Court order compelling Black Cube to disclose the name of the client who commissioned the group to investigate and write a report on Evolution’s activities.
Evolution alleges that the 2021 report prepared by Black Cube contained “highly inflammatory and knowingly false claims about Evolution and its business practices” that were “intended to substantially harm the company for anti-competitive reasons”.
The live dealer company claims Black Cube used “false personas and disguises” to conduct its investigation, secretly recording conversations and interviews with current or former Evolution employees and board members.
The report was submitted to US state regulators in November 2021 by the law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP, which resulted in Evolution filing a lawsuit against the firm and the then-anonymous parties behind the report in the Superior Court of New Jersey.
This case is ongoing and was amended by Evolution to include Black Cube, which is what led to the court compelling Black Cube to provide information around the report. It will soon be amended again to include Playtech.
Playtech noted that the investigation took place “lawfully to better understand and verify concerns of significant regulatory and commercial importance” and that it clearly shows Evolution’s business practices “undermine lawful and compliant gambling operations,” damaging trust in the industry’s credibility and impacting government tax collection.
Evolution: report caused multi-billion dollar damage
Evolution has stated that it will now amend its complaint to include Playtech, noting that the litigation “can proceed in earnest and is expected to extend through 2026”.
“It is deeply disturbing to learn that one of our competitors has gone to such extraordinary lengths to damage our business and reputation by hiring Black Cube and paying them over £1.8m to fabricate a report they knew would have extremely harmful repercussions,” said Evolution.
“The report, which was furnished to regulators by a law firm representing Black Cube, Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP, and purposely leaked to the media, was determined by two state regulators in the U.S. to be lacking in evidentiary support.
“Later, the New Jersey Superior Court also determined that the defamatory report was untruthful and lacked veracity. Notwithstanding those findings, dissemination of the report has resulted in multi-billion dollar damage to our company.”
Further down in the statement, Evolution added: “Although Playtech has finally been identified after years of trying to keep its involvement in this smear campaign a secret, Black Cube continues to evade the Court’s discovery orders by withholding relevant information.
“We will continue to hold Black Cube, Playtech, and all the other players in this defamatory scheme responsible for their misconduct. We are confident in our legal position and look forward to finally holding Playtech and its accomplices to account for the significant harm they have caused.”
Playtech welcomes court examination
In response to Evolution’s claims, Playtech has stated that the suggestion that its subsidiary engaged in a smear campaign is “wholly untrue and is designed to distract from serious questions about Evolution’s business practices”.
The company added that it stands by its decision to commission the report and that it welcomes a court examination.
Playtech said: “PTS commissioned an independent business intelligence firm to investigate credible and repeated concerns raised by operators, suppliers and regulators about Evolution’s activities in prohibited and sanctioned markets, and its supply to unlicensed operators in regulated markets.
“The investigation was undertaken lawfully to better understand and verify concerns of significant regulatory and commercial importance.
“The report published, as a result of the investigation, clearly evidences that Evolution’s business practices undermine lawful and compliant gambling operations. Such conduct damages trust in the credibility of the entire industry and also ultimately impacts government tax collection.
“Playtech stands by the decision to commission the report. Evolution continues to seek to avoid legitimate scrutiny rather than address longstanding questions about its conduct, including its decision to supply operators in illegal markets and to support unlicensed operators in regulated markets.
“Playtech welcomes court examination of the report and its findings. Playtech is confident that these proceedings will confirm the credibility and legitimacy of the investigation and the importance of the issues it seeks to address.”
Timeline
Evolution stated that in December 2020, Playtech hired Black Cube to produce a defamatory report on its operations, “accusing it of regulatory violations that was designed to harm Evolution’s business and destroy its reputation”.
The company also claims that “high-level Playtech executives, including but not limited to CEO Mor Weizer, communicated with Black Cube regarding the investigation and report”.
The report was submitted to the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (NJDGE) and the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) by Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP in November 2021.
Evolution claims the firm was paid “approximately $33,700 for its services, which included purportedly reviewing the report, drafting a cover letter that reiterated the report’s false claims, and sending it to Evolution’s regulators”.
The next month, Evolution filed a lawsuit against Calcagni & Kanefsky and the then-anonymous parties behind the report in the Superior Court of New Jersey, for “defamation, trade libel, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, fraud, and other illegal conduct”. This case is ongoing.
Evolution noted that Playtech and Black Cube “took extraordinary measures to conceal their roles in commissioning and creating the defamatory report, hiding behind assertions of privilege and immunity”.
In February 2024, the NJDGE and PGCB closed their investigations into Evolution, deciding that they wouldn’t take any corrective action.
The NJDGE stated that they found no evidence that Evolution took illegal bets in New Jersey, another state or any prohibited jurisdiction or accepted inappropriate payments from clients or provided devices for customers to illegally use their content.
Earlier this year, the New Jersey Superior Court directed Calcagni & Kanefsky to disclose the identity of its client and the report’s author, concluding that “the report is not truthful and Plaintiffs[] suffered damages and continue[] to suffer damages in the casino gaming industry as a direct result of [Defendants’] actions”.
In April, Black Cube’s identity was revealed by Calcagni & Kanefsky, but the law firm stated that they didn’t know the identity of the client who commissioned the intelligence firm to produce the report. Evolution amended its complaint to include Black Cube in June.
An affidavit was then filed by Black Cube’s Founder and Director, Avi Yanus, with evidence to legitimise the 2021 report, with Evolution claiming that evidence was collected “using the same unethical methods”, including false personas and pretences to secretly record a former Evolution employee, then cherry-pick the recording to “support their predetermined narrative”.
Last month, Black Cube was ordered by the New Jersey Superior Court to reveal the identity of its client, with the court finding the report to be “objectively baseless,” stating that “no reasonable litigant could expect success on the merits,” with the judge also referring to the affidavit as “selfserving”.
Black Cube attempted to appeal the order to the New Jersey Appellate Division, which was unsuccessful. The company also sought an emergency review by the state’s Superior Court, which was denied.
