Class Action Says DraftKings Used AI to Pick Out Vulnerable Bettors

Daniel Vest, a bettor from West Virginia, has filed a proposed class action against DraftKings in the US District Court in Boston. He alleges the company used artificial intelligence to find the customers most likely to keep gambling and losing, then targeted them with promotions. Vest says he received at least about 70 messages from DraftKings in roughly 30 days.

None of it has been proven, and DraftKings denies it. The complaint was filed on September 30 as case 1:26-cv-14462 and assigned to Judge Brian E. Murphy. The legal challenge comes as state gaming regulators across the United States scrutinise the use of algorithmic marketing, such as the Massachusetts Gaming Commission that said it would look at how sportsbooks use AI.

A Lawsuit Built on a Newspaper Investigation

The complaint draws on a New York Times investigation published on September 19, which reported that DraftKings built a machine learning model in 2023 to work out who’d respond to promotions by gambling and losing more. Vest’s lawyers quote it throughout. They say the allegations rest on “information and belief”, apart from the ones about Vest himself.

Those are specific. Under this algorithmic framework, users assigned high elasticity scores, which indicated a statistical likelihood to increase wagering volume and absorb financial losses in response to promotional offers, were targeted with aggressive retention campaigns.

Vest says he has gambled thousands of dollars a year with DraftKings, on both its sportsbook and its online casino games, and that he’s been “inundated” with emails, texts and app notifications. Some arrived if he went just a few days without gambling, he alleges.

The complaint reproduces a promotional email dated September 23, and alleges that the class action suit could run from thousands of people to millions, citing the Times’ figure of 11 million DraftKings customers.

Contract Claims Now, Chapter 93A Later

The suit doesn’t yet claim a violation of the Massachusetts consumer protection law, Chapter 93A. A footnote says the only claims “currently being asserted” are breach of contract, breach of implied contract and money had and received.

The contract in question is DraftKings’ own privacy notice. It says the company may use customer information as part of its “commitment to responsible play”, and may contact people “to provide resources to help ensure that you are playing responsibly.” Vest alleges DraftKings used the data for “the exact opposite purpose.”

He wants damages, refunds, disgorgement and an injunction stopping DraftKings from using the model to target users with extra promotions. The complaint puts the amount in controversy above $5 million, which it cites as its basis for bringing a class action in federal court.

A Sportsbook Rule Meets a Casino Model

Vest also alleges that DraftKings broke a Massachusetts sports wagering regulation, 205 CMR 257.02. It bars operators from basing promotional offers on any algorithm, machine learning or AI system “known or reasonably expected” to “make the gaming platform more addictive.” The complaint adds that DraftKings didn’t tell users it was using the model, or their personal information, this way.

The regulation additionally bars licensed operators from deploying targeted promotional offers triggered by periods of user dormancy or platform non-use. While DraftKings maintains that its predictive models were designed within lawful commercial parameters, the intersection of sports betting rules and cross-vertical iGaming applications presents a complex compliance challenge, as machine learning models trained on casino gaming behavior are frequently integrated into unified multi-product mobile applications.

DraftKings Denies It, Officials Take Note

Park Winslow, a DraftKings spokesperson, gave this statement to WBUR, Boston’s NPR station: “DraftKings does not use AI to target customers based on losses, nor do we use AI to target customers based on indicators of potential problem gaming.” The statement added that the company intends to “vigorously defend any potential lawsuits on the matter.”

Both the attorney general’s office and the state auditor’s office have reviewed the lawsuit, WBUR reported. Molly McGlynn, a spokesperson for Attorney General Andrea Campbell, said: “The allegations raise serious concerns about the potential use of technology to target or exploit consumers, particularly those who may be vulnerable to problem gambling or gambling addiction.”

State Auditor Diana DiZoglio said in a statement: “These allegations are deeply concerning and, if substantiated, completely unacceptable.” Her office’s 2025 audit of the commission found 51 instances where sports betting marketing went to people under 21 and people with gambling addictions. A commission spokesperson told WBUR it doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

The Money Behind the Promos

DraftKings reported revenue of $6.05 billion for 2025, according to the 10-K figures quoted in the complaint, and the same filing calls responsible gaming “fundamental to DraftKings’ mission.” The Times, citing research by Citizens Bank, put the promotions it gave out last year at about $3 billion.

The Chapter 93A claim is on a clock. Vest sent DraftKings a demand notice under the statute alongside the complaint. Unless the company makes “an acceptable tender of settlement”, the footnote says, he’ll move after 30 days to add the claim and seek additional damages.