DraftKings sportsbook and online casino customers who received targeted promotions may be covered by a proposed class action alleging DraftKings used a machine-learning model to find gamblers likely to lose more and aimed extra offers at them, contrary to a privacy-notice promise to use player data for responsible play. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. DraftKings, Inc. has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is the DraftKings AI Lawsuit?
A proposed class action filed on September 30, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts accuses DraftKings of using customers’ own betting data to decide who should get more promotions, based on how much more each person was likely to lose. The case is Vest v. DraftKings, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14462, and it is assigned to Judge Brian E. Murphy. DraftKings is headquartered in Boston.The named plaintiff is a West Virginia resident who, according to the complaint, has used DraftKings’ sportsbook and online casino for several years and has gambled thousands of dollars a year with the company. The complaint alleges that DraftKings built a machine-learning model to identify customers who would respond to promotions by betting and losing more, sent those customers extra offers and messages, and in doing so broke a promise in its privacy notices to use customer information to check whether people are playing responsibly. The plaintiff is represented by Block & Leviton LLP and Lynch Carpenter LLP. No court has ruled on any of the allegations.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What the Complaint Says DraftKings Built
Most of the complaint’s account of the model comes from a New York Times report published on September 19, 2026. The complaint says the newspaper interviewed more than 40 former DraftKings employees and reviewed internal research memos, presentations, Slack messages and betting records from experiments run on customers.Drawing on that reporting, the complaint alleges that in mid-2023 DraftKings began building a machine-learning model for its online casino to predict how promotions would translate into each customer’s eventual wins or losses, and that it started building similar models for sports betting around the same time. According to the complaint, the model looked at dozens of data points per customer, including how often they played, their daily account balances and how much they typically lost relative to what they wagered, and it folded in a separate model estimating how likely a customer was to stop gambling. Each customer received a score; the higher the score, the more the customer was expected to lose for each promotion offered.
The complaint says customers with below-average scores were labeled “inelastic” and marked for fewer incentives. It alleges that the customers on the other side of that line, the “elastic” ones, were sent additional emails, texts, in-app notifications and offers designed to keep them betting and to stop them from leaving. It also cites former employees’ accounts that DraftKings sidelined a separate model that would have assigned customers risk scores for problem gambling. Those are allegations drawn from press reporting, and DraftKings has not had an opportunity to answer them in this case.
The Privacy Notice Promise at the Center of the Case
The lawsuit is built on DraftKings’ own privacy notices for its sportsbook and its casino, which the complaint says are identical on this point. Under a “Responsible Play” heading, the notices say that “we may use the information collected about you to assess whether you are responsibly playing” and that DraftKings may contact customers with resources if it identifies potentially problematic information.The plaintiff’s theory is that this language is part of the deal customers accept when they sign up, deposit money and hand over their personal information. The complaint alleges DraftKings used that same information for the opposite purpose: to find the people most likely to keep losing and to send them more reasons to bet. It also alleges DraftKings never told customers it was using a model, machine learning or their data that way.
The complaint describes the plaintiff’s own experience as an example. It says he received at least about 70 emails, texts, in-app notifications or other messages from DraftKings in the roughly 30 days before September 25, 2026, and that he has received offers such as profit boosts, including ones sent when he went a few days without placing a bet.
Who Is in the Proposed Class?
The complaint proposes a single class of everyone who, within the applicable statute of limitations, either was classified by DraftKings as “elastic” or received targeted emails, texts, in-app notifications, messages, incentives or promotions from DraftKings based on its use of the model. The class is not limited to any one state as pleaded.DraftKings, its affiliates, officers, directors and employees, their families, and the assigned judge and that judge’s family are excluded. The complaint does not give a class size. It notes that DraftKings has said it has about 11 million customers, acknowledges that not all of them would be class members, and says the members can be identified from DraftKings’ records. The definition is a proposal only; a judge would have to certify a class before anyone is formally part of the case.
Legal Claims and What the Lawsuit Seeks
The complaint brings three claims on behalf of the plaintiff and the proposed class:- Breach of contract, alleging DraftKings broke the responsible-play terms of its privacy notices
- Breach of implied contract, pleaded in the alternative if no express contract is found
- Money had and received, alleging it would be unjust for DraftKings to keep money customers paid after the model targeted them
The complaint also points to a Massachusetts Gaming Commission regulation, 205 CMR 257.02, which it says limits how sports wagering operators may use patrons’ personal and account information, including a bar on using it to promote wagers or offers through automated or machine-learning systems that the operator knows or reasonably expects would make the platform more addictive.
The plaintiff is not suing under the Massachusetts consumer protection statute, Chapter 93A, yet. The complaint says he sent DraftKings the 30-day demand letter that statute requires and plans to ask the court for permission to add a Chapter 93A claim if DraftKings does not make an acceptable settlement offer. The lawsuit asks for class certification, actual and consequential damages, the return or disgorgement of money DraftKings collected through practices tied to the model, statutory damages, interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, and an order barring DraftKings from using the model to send extra messages and promotions meant to keep customers gambling. It demands a jury trial. Those are the plaintiff’s requests, not amounts anyone has been awarded.
How This Case Differs From Other DraftKings Lawsuits
DraftKings already faces gambling addiction litigation, most prominently Macek v. DraftKings, a Pennsylvania class action that was dismissed in March 2026 after the judge found DraftKings did not owe bettors a duty of care to protect them from addiction. That ruling is on appeal to the Third Circuit, and the latest developments in the addiction cases are tracked separately.This lawsuit takes a different route. Rather than arguing DraftKings had a general duty to protect gamblers, it argues DraftKings made a specific written promise about how it would use customer data and then broke it. DraftKings is also defending a separate class action alleging its Predictions app is an unlicensed sportsbook in states where it holds no betting license.
What Happens Next
DraftKings will respond to the complaint, and a motion to dismiss is common at this stage. If the case survives, the parties exchange evidence and the plaintiff can ask the court to certify the class. The plaintiff may also seek to amend the complaint to add a Chapter 93A claim after the 30-day demand period runs. The case could settle at any point.There is no claim form and nothing for DraftKings customers to submit now. If the case settles or a class is certified, class members are normally notified and told how to file a claim or opt out.
Questions
What does the DraftKings AI lawsuit claim?
The complaint alleges that DraftKings built a machine-learning model, starting in 2023, that scored customers by how much more they were likely to lose in response to promotions, and then sent extra offers, emails, texts and in-app messages to the customers the model flagged. It argues this broke a promise in DraftKings’ privacy notices to use customer information to assess whether people are playing responsibly. DraftKings has not been found liable, and the allegations have not been tested in court.
Who is in the proposed DraftKings class?
The complaint proposes a class of everyone who, within the applicable statute of limitations, was classified by DraftKings as “elastic” or received targeted emails, texts, in-app notifications, messages, incentives or promotions based on the model. DraftKings, its affiliates and employees, and the judge’s family are excluded. The definition is a proposal only and has not been approved by the court.
Is there money available from the DraftKings AI lawsuit?
No. The case was filed on September 30, 2026, no class has been certified, and there is no settlement, fund or claim form. The complaint asks for the return of money paid after customers were targeted by the model, damages and an order stopping the practice, but those are requests, not awards.
Where does the information about the DraftKings model come from?
Most of the description of the model in the complaint is drawn from a September 19, 2026 New York Times report, which the complaint says was based on interviews with more than 40 former DraftKings employees and on internal memos, presentations, Slack messages and betting records. The complaint adds the named plaintiff’s own account of the messages and offers he received.
Is this the same case as the DraftKings gambling addiction lawsuit?
No. The gambling addiction class action, Macek v. DraftKings, was filed in Pennsylvania, was dismissed in March 2026 and is on appeal to the Third Circuit. This case was filed in Massachusetts and rests on contract claims tied to DraftKings’ privacy notices rather than on a duty to protect gamblers from addiction.
Sources
• Class Action Complaint, Vest v. DraftKings, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14462 (D. Mass., filed September 30, 2026), Document 1: DraftKings class action complaint (PDF).• Vest v. DraftKings, Inc. docket on CourtListener.
• Alex Klavens, Walt Bogdanich and Jenny Vrentas, “How DraftKings Uses A.I. to Target the Gamblers Likeliest to Lose,” The New York Times, September 19, 2026, as cited in the complaint.
