Adam Roarty is a journalist covering sports betting, regulation, and industry innovation for CasinoBeats. His coverage includes tax increases in the UK, covering breaking stories in the ever-evolving landscape of US betting such as the...
Read Full BioGaming operator Trey Franzoy has filed a lawsuit against the Colorado Division of Gaming and three cities, alleging his business has been wrongly identified as illegal gambling, when in fact he is offering skill-based games.
The Colorado Springs Police Department seized over $100,000 and several gaming machines from Franzoy’s business, Charlie Chedda’s and Patriot Contest & Games in 2023.
This year, the court ordered a return of the funds and assets, ruling that the machines were, in fact, skill-based and therefore should not be classified as illegal gambling.
Franzoy’s lawsuit alleges that many of his assets have yet to be returned, and he is additionally seeking compensation for the loss to his business. He claims the wrongful seizure violates his 4th amendment.
In addition to the gambling regulator, he has filed lawsuits against the cities of Colorado Springs, Pueblo, and Grand Junction, where his business operates.
Looks Like a Slot, Quacks Like a Slot, But Not a Slot
Franzoy admits that his machines look like slot machines. In comments to local news network KRDO, he stated, “In today’s day and age, looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck, doesn’t work anymore.“
“We have AI, we have Photoshop, we have all of these things. And thankfully, the law doesn’t work that way. It’s the way something actually functions. These clearly don’t function like a slot machine.”
Franzoy went on to detail how his machines are not chance-based. He said, “Contest video games are where people come and compete for existing prizes, and they have to utilize skill to do that.”
On the machines at Franzoy’s businesses, one of the rows doesn’t spin like the others. Instead, once the spin is completed, players are left with an option and a timer.
“You physically have to pick [an option]. If you don’t pick anything, nothing is just given to you. If I let this timer run out, don’t make any selection, I’m not going to be awarded a prize,” Franzoy said. “There’s no chance awards or anything like that involved in these games.”
Other States Grapple With Skill Games
Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court is considering arguments from gaming operators, such as Franzoy, on what constitutes a game of skill and what constitutes gambling.
Senior Deputy Attorney General Susan Affronti challenged the assertion that skill games differ from slot machines. She stated, “Gambling is the hope of gaining something beyond the amount played, and that’s what creates the dangers associated with gambling.”
Under Colorado’s law, skill-based games can be treated as simulated gambling devices if chance plays a role in the outcome. The Colorado Gaming Association maintains that this renders Franzoy’s machines gambling, and as such, the seizure of the machines and the profits derived from them was lawful.
While a judge ruled in Franzoy’s favor last month, the lawsuit filed risks another judge interpreting the law differently and ruling against the gaming operator.
A judge in Missouri recently ruled against gaming company Torch Electronics, finding that the company’s “No Chance Games” are gambling devices.
Other cases in Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, and Ontario have struggled to clearly define where the line between skill and chance should fall. The case in Colorado could be pivotal for the future of skill gaming in the state.
