Key Takeaways
-
- In an Oct. 27 ruling, a U.S. federal judge said it is “undisputed” that Israel-based Papaya Gaming, maker of the Solitaire Cash app, used bots from 2019 until at least 2023.
- The company told customers that its games involved only human players.
- Papaya told customers over 200 times that “we do not use bots” and closed the accounts of multiple players who expressed suspicion about bots in their games.
- Papaya removed posts in its Facebook group that mentioned bots.
- Skillz Platform Inc., a competitor to Papaya, sued Papaya in March 2024.
- Skillz said it lost market share due to Papaya’s allegedly illegal conduct.
- According to an expert hired by Skillz, the company suffered “actual damages” of $637 million, and Papaya was unjustly enriched by as much as $719 million.
- During discovery, Papaya executives asserted their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
- Bots may have made Papaya an unregulated “gambling platform,” the judge said.
- A DraftKings-affiliated investment group owns a stake in Papaya.
- Days after the court ruling, on Nov. 3, ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith announced a partnership with Papaya.
In a 35-page opinion and order, Judge Denise Cote denied Papaya’s motion for summary judgment on claims that it used bots in games it advertised as peer-to-peer competitions.
Skillz provided sufficient evidence to allow a jury to find in its favor, wrote Judge Cote of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Papaya and Skillz operate so-called real-money, skill-based (RMSB) mobile games.
The investment group Drive by DraftKings invested in Papaya.
Bots on Solitaire Cash
Judge Cote said that Papaya used two types of bots: liquidity bots and tailored bots.
Liquidity bots filled in user slots to ensure that a solitaire tournament would start faster. Tailored bots, on the other hand, were used to create “a predetermined outcome” like a house-banked gambling game.
The judge wrote, quoting a Papaya document:
Tailored bots are employed in sessions where Papaya “want[s] the player to finish at some predefined rank,” which requires “control[ling] the scores of the rest of the players.” In these sessions, Papaya wants “to guarantee a specific outcome (win/lose/specific rank) to the user in a tournament.
Papaya customers inquired between 2021 and 2023 whether they were playing against other humans or bots. According to Judge Cote, a Papaya internal policy memorandum instructed customer service representatives to escalate any complaints to management that referenced “bot” or “AI,” or where the user accused Papaya of matching them with non-human opponents.
According to Judge Cote, for one player who raised suspicion, Papaya co-founder and chief technology officer Andrey Birman instructed the customer service team to close the account because the player “smells like trouble.”
Bots Could Turn ‘Solitaire Cash’ Into Gambling
Judge Cote said there is “evidence that Papaya may not have been able to operate in the RMSB marketplace at all if it publicly and accurately disclosed its use of bots.”
With bots, Solitaire Cash could be classified as a “gambling platform,” Judge Cote said. Essentially, the app could be a casino, rather than a “skill-based” gaming platform.
RMSB games make money from entry fees, advertising, or in-app purchases. In contrast, online casinos generate revenue directly from player losses.
“Accordingly, had Papaya disclosed its use of bots, Papaya may have been faced with the regulatory and tax requirements with which gambling platforms must comply. In addition, it may have lost access to app stores and payment processors and have been excluded from the RMSB market,” Judge Cote wrote.
Stephen A. Smith Promotes Product
Smith, a prominent ESPN host, and Papaya announced a deal not long after Judge Cote’s ruling.
According to a press release from Papaya dated Nov. 3, Smith will serve as the “official ambassador” for the upcoming World Solitaire Championship in February 2026.
Papaya plans to hold the “finals” in person in Miami.
Smith posted about the partnership on Nov. 3. Many observers ridiculed his announcement, calling it a promotion of gambling.
It appears Smith’s endorsement was the start of a broader Solitaire Cash influencer marketing campaign. ESPN’s Mina Kimes also posted about using the controversial product.
Days later, Kimes issued an apology about endorsing the product: “The truth is: I didn’t spend any time looking into the whole thing, and that’s 100% on me. Thought it was just typical marketing work, and I’m deeply embarrassed I didn’t vet it. A colossal f*ck-up on my part.”
Smith has yet to apologize or revoke his endorsement.
Michigan Says Papaya Is Illegal Gambling
In 2024, the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB) issued a cease-and-desist letter to Papaya over Solitaire Cash.
The MGCB also said that the Israeli company’s other products — 21 Cash, Bingo Cash, and Bubble Cash — are illegal gambling. Papaya does not have a poker product.
“Illegal gambling is not tolerated in Michigan, and we will take all necessary actions to protect our residents from such unlawful practices,” MGCB Executive Director Henry Williams said.
Bottom Line: Is the Solitaire Cash App Legit?
According to a lawsuit related to bots, Michigan’s cease-and-desist letter, and multiple negative App Store reviews, Solitaire Cash is not a legitimate gaming platform.
Despite an endorsement from Stephen A. Smith, numerous allegations have been made regarding the app’s potential harm to consumers. Online gambling can be highly addictive.
App Store reviews claim Solitaire Cash is “rigged” and that developers “manipulate the game once you start winning.” The App Store has Solitaire Cash in its “card” game category.
Meanwhile, the Google Play Store has the app in its “casino” category.
Another lawsuit (this one on behalf of a user) alleged there were bots on Solitaire Cash.
Solitaire Cash FAQ
What is the lawsuit against Solitaire Cash?
There are multiple lawsuits against Solitaire Cash. The lawsuit involving rival Skillz involves allegations of unjust enrichment by Papaya Gaming’s use of bots in games it claimed were human-versus-human.
Another class action lawsuit also accused Papaya and Solitaire Cash of using bots to harm consumers.
Does Solitaire Cash Really Pay?
According to numerous lawsuits, Solitaire Cash does not rightfully pay some winners. According to a federal judge, the platform used bots while telling its users that games only involved human players.
You should consider avoiding Solitaire Cash to prevent potential harm.
What is the Trick to Solitaire Cash?
The app tricked users by deploying bots to allegedly cause customer losses, according to a federal judge in New York. The trick that Solitaire Cash used was the use of bots in its games.
Furthermore, numerous user reviews warn against using the Solitaire Cash app.
Image by Sergei Tokmakov, Esq from Pixabay.
Discover more from GamblingHarm.org
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
