In a significant move by Sweden’s gambling authority Spelinspektionen, substantial penalty fees have been levied against game developers Hacksaw Gaming and Panda Bluemoon for infringing regulatory guidelines. Hacksaw Gaming has been ordered to pay a penalty fee amounting to SEK2.6 million (£192,741/€226,351/$246,236), while Panda Bluemoon faces a fine of SEK700,000 for similar violations within Swedish jurisdiction.
Back in January, Spelinspektionen identified that Hacksaw Gaming was distributing content to two unlicensed, unnamed gambling platforms, which violates Swedish regulations. This discovery came despite a prior reminder issued by the regulator in October 2023 to providers to adhere strictly to their legal obligations.
As a response to the regulatory breach, Hacksaw Gaming asserted that it had implemented measures to restrict access to its games within Sweden. One of these measures includes geo-blocking technology, which should ideally prevent users attempting to play its games via unauthorized sites by displaying a message indicating that the game is inaccessible in Sweden.
Hacksaw Gaming further argued that developers cannot bear responsibility if their games are accessed in jurisdictions where the operating entity does not hold a valid license. The developer emphasized that its efforts do not intentionally focus on making its games available in Sweden without the necessary licensing.
Despite Hacksaw’s defense, Spelinspektionen found that the presence of Hacksaw Gaming’s content on Swedish sites evidenced insufficient efficacy in its geo-blocking mechanisms. The regulatory body also disputed the claim that operators should solely be accountable for such infractions.
“The responsibility to ensure that gaming software is not provided to players without the necessary licensure falls squarely on the license holder, regardless of any agreements with third parties,” the regulator stated.
Although Spelinspektionen acknowledged Hacksaw Gaming’s adjustments to mitigate future breaches, it maintained that the gravity of the breach warranted both a financial penalty and a formal warning.
Similarly, Panda Bluemoon faced scrutiny and was contacted in January for supplying games to two unlicensed platforms. Like Hacksaw, Panda Bluemoon argued that its users would encounter warning messages when attempting to access its games through unauthorized sites and claimed that the operators were distributing its games without permission.
Correspondingly, Panda Bluemoon highlighted that it had enacted measures to avert similar issues moving forward and contended that imposing a penalty or warning was excessive relative to the breach.
.
However, Spelinspektionen delivered a comparable assessment as in the Hacksaw case. The regulator emphasized that it is also the developer’s responsibility to ensure the restricted availability of their games without the requisite licenses. Furthermore, the measures taken by Panda Bluemoon were deemed “inadequate” by the regulator.
“The fact that players from Sweden see a message stating ‘the game is not available from your region’ does not alter our assessment,” Spelinspektionen underscored. “It remains the licensee’s duty to prevent their game software from being accessible to players without the appropriate licensure.”
Consequently, Spelinspektionen decided that Panda Bluemoon should incur a fine of SEK700,000 and issued an official warning to the developer.
In another notable development, the Administrative Court has nullified a previously issued injunction against Zimpler by Spelinspektionen. The case dates back to July 2023, when Spelinspektionen alerted Zimpler about the potential imposition of a significant fine if it continued to work with offshore brands. The fine reportedly could reach up to SEK25.0 million.
This injunction was enacted due to Zimpler’s use of BankID, a Swedish e-identification service, for transactions with unlicensed sites. Zimpler opposed this action, filing an appeal and arguing that it had already announced its intent to cease business relations with the said operators one month before the regulator’s warning.
Despite assurances that ending these relationships would satisfy the regulatory requirements, Zimpler chose to proceed with a formal appeal. This strategy has proved successful as the Administrative Court found insufficient grounds for the injunction, thus revoking the original decision.
While this judgment could still be subject to an appeal in the Court of Appeal in Jönköping, it stands as a notable instance of regulatory interaction in the Swedish gambling industry.
