Israel-based Papaya Gaming has responded to allegations raised by rival skill gaming developer Skillz in a lawsuit filed in New York’s Southern District Court by countering those claims with their own counterclaims.
The core of the dispute concerns the alleged use of computer bots in the companies’ mobile games. Skillz, which initiated the legal action in March, accused Papaya of using bots in its peer-to-peer skill games played for real money, which they argued put developers who don’t use bots at a competitive disadvantage. Skillz contended that Papaya altered its platform to allow for bots, speeding up the player pairing process unfairly.
Papaya, a developer that publishes its skill-based games on the Skillz platform, fired back by rejecting most of Skillz’s claims. Papaya insisted that while they never advertised or disclosed the non-use of bots, their games remain fair. They emphasized that quick matchmaking is a desirable feature in skill-based mobile gaming platforms, and maintained that bots are only employed during tutorials for new players to learn gameplay. Papaya clarified that their matchmaking algorithm is designed to expedite the pairing process naturally.
Skillz has embarked on a legal mission to restore credibility to the mobile skill game industry through court interventions. In a related development, a federal jury in Northern California sided with Skillz in a lawsuit against AviaGames, ruling that Avia willfully breached Skillz’s patented platform to manipulate gameplay in their favor. As a result, Skillz was awarded nearly $42.9 million. Meanwhile, a class-action lawsuit regarding Avia’s alleged use of bots is still underway, as is another proposed class-action lawsuit against Papaya for the same issue.
Skillz’s legal strategy also includes allegations against other developers like Voodoo Gaming, who they claim also use bots. However, Papaya has countered these claims, accusing Skillz of launching a smear campaign filled with false allegations. Papaya highlighted Skillz’s creation of a purportedly fraudulent website, 4FairPlay.org, which they allege disseminates false information about Skillz’s competitors.
Papaya’s counterclaims argue that Skillz has engaged in deceitful behavior to mislead customers and state agencies. They accuse Skillz of falsely portraying its platform as “absolutely free of computerized opponents” and argue that Skillz is manipulating narratives to harm Papaya’s reputation. The counterclaims also assert that Skillz misled customers regarding the ease of withdrawing deposited funds and ignored bot use on its platform, despite publicly claiming their games are “bot-free.”
Both companies have requested a jury trial, akin to the Skillz v. Avia lawsuit. A spokesperson for Papaya affirmed that the company plans to defend its operations rigorously and intends to reveal what they consider Skillz’s smear campaign. Papaya’s counterclaims describe how Skillz, facing poor business performance, allegedly embarked on a deceitful campaign against them while hypocritically accusing others of the same deceptive practices. Additionally, Papaya contends that Skillz infringed on their intellectual property in developing its own games, further complicating the legal battle.
The litigation between these two companies underscores the competitive and sometimes contentious nature of the mobile skill gaming industry, with both sides steadfast in defending their operations and reputations in the court of law.
