Table of Contents
Black Cube Seeks Dismissal Under Anti-SLAPP Protections
Black Cube has requested dismissal of Evolution’s lawsuit under the New Jersey Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), arguing the case represents a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) designed to silence legitimate regulatory reporting through costly litigation.
The intelligence firm’s defense centers on the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which shields entities that petition government agencies—in this case, submissions made to gambling regulators. Black Cube’s legal team maintains that their reports to regulatory authorities were factually accurate and that Evolution has not demonstrated the firm acted with actual malice.
New Documentation Alleges Games Accessible in Iran, Russia, Syria
The court filing includes a sworn affidavit from Dr. Avi Yanus, Black Cube’s director, who describes the new findings as "unequivocal." According to the submission, video evidence shows Evolution’s games remain playable from sanctioned territories including Iran, Syria, and Russia, as well as through unlicensed operators in regulated European markets.
Black Cube claims to have documented the complete user experience through video recordings, covering IP verification, deposit processes, and actual gameplay. The evidence breakdown includes:
Sanctioned Territories:
- Iran: More than 25 video recordings spanning 2022-2025 showing successful wagers on Evolution games from within the country
- Russia: 12 recordings demonstrating game availability
- Syria: 9 recordings of accessible gameplay
Black Market Access:
- France: Documentation showing Evolution games available despite the company lacking authorization to operate in the market
- Additional evidence of games offered through offshore operators in Spain, Italy, and the UK
The filing references statements allegedly made by Evolution’s former Commercial Director for North America, who reportedly acknowledged the company’s operations in "sanctioned countries," describing the revelation as a "shock."
Commercial Speech and Competitor Funding Debate
Evolution has argued that Black Cube’s investigation loses free speech protection because it was funded by a competitor—widely reported in the industry to be Playtech, though identified only as a "competitor" in court documents. Evolution contends this funding relationship triggers the commercial speech exception to anti-SLAPP protections.
Black Cube disputes this characterization, asserting the commercial speech exception does not apply because the report did not promote Black Cube’s own goods or services. The firm’s attorneys argue that competitor funding does not eliminate their right to invoke UPEPA protection when reporting regulatory concerns to authorities.
Evolution Challenges Evidence Validity
Evolution has attempted to discredit Black Cube’s documentation by questioning technical details, including the use of private IP addresses and alleged discrepancies in system timestamps within the video footage. The Swedish operator also points to the lack of enforcement action by the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE) following Black Cube’s initial report, arguing this demonstrates the accusations were without merit.
Black Cube has dismissed Evolution’s objections as "splitting hairs," maintaining that isolated failed access attempts do not invalidate dozens of recordings that allegedly confirm regulatory violations.
Court Decision Awaited
The Superior Court of New Jersey now faces the decision of whether to grant Black Cube’s dismissal motion or allow the litigation to continue. The case has drawn significant attention within the iGaming industry, as the proceedings could potentially expose further details about compliance practices in the global online gambling market.
The outcome will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial, or if Black Cube’s anti-SLAPP motion successfully ends Evolution’s legal challenge.
