Evolution accuses Playtech of running defamatory campaign

Evolution AB, a leading provider in the online gaming sector, has publicly accused Playtech plc of commissioning a targeted smear campaign through the private intelligence firm Black Cube. According to Evolution, the campaign was designed to damage its reputation and commercial standing, whereas Playtech denies all allegations, asserting that its investigation into Evolution’s operations was legitimate, lawful, and of regulatory relevance.

The dispute underscores the highly competitive nature of the B2B iGaming market, where reputational risks, regulatory compliance, and commercial rivalry intersect. Both companies are now preparing for prolonged litigation, which is expected to continue into 2026.

Allegations Against Playtech

On 21 October 2025, Evolution AB made public statements claiming it had traced a defamatory report back to Playtech Software Limited (PTS), a subsidiary of Playtech plc. The report in question, commissioned in 2021, allegedly contained “highly inflammatory and knowingly false claims” intended to harm Evolution’s reputation for anti-competitive purposes.

Evolution asserts that Playtech paid Black Cube more than £1.8 million to compile the report. In addition, the law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP was reportedly paid approximately $33,700 to submit the report to U.S. regulatory authorities, including the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (NJDGE) and the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB). The law firm is alleged to have prepared a cover letter repeating the report’s alleged falsehoods, thereby giving it official credibility.

Black Cube’s Alleged Role

According to Evolution, the intelligence firm Black Cube conducted what it described as an “investigation” using false identities and deceptive tactics. The firm allegedly approached at least five current or former Evolution employees and board members under pretense, secretly recording interactions to use selectively in its final report.

Evolution claims that Black Cube edited these recordings to present a misleading narrative, accusing Evolution of activities in sanctioned markets and providing services to unlicensed operators—allegations the company describes as entirely fabricated.

The company further alleges that Black Cube paid $10,000 to HeraldPR, a New York-based public relations agency, to amplify the claims. HeraldPR’s founder, Juda S. Engelmayer, has previously been described in U.S. media as a “go-to publicist” for high-profile or controversial clients.

Publication and Media Coverage

The report was reportedly submitted to regulators in November 2021. Shortly thereafter, Bloomberg published an article summarizing its allegations. Evolution contends that this coverage, along with the underlying report, caused “multi-billion-dollar damage” to its reputation in the online gaming sector.

In response to the allegations, Evolution initiated a defamation and trade libel lawsuit in December 2021 against Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP and the then-unknown authors of the report. Over the following years, court orders gradually revealed the parties behind the investigation, leading to further scrutiny of the report and its origins.

Court Findings and Regulatory Responses

By February 2024, both the NJDGE and PGCB concluded their respective investigations into Evolution. The NJDGE found “no evidence showing that Evolution took illegal bets from New Jersey, another state, or any other prohibited jurisdiction” and “no evidence of inappropriate payments.” These findings effectively cleared Evolution of the alleged regulatory violations.

In February 2025, the New Jersey Superior Court ruled that the Black Cube report “is not truthful” and concluded that Evolution “suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in the casino gaming industry as a direct result” of the report’s publication.

By April 2025, Black Cube had been publicly identified as the author of the report. Initially, the law firm involved refused to disclose its client, further complicating legal proceedings. In September 2025, the court described the 2021 report as “objectively baseless,” stating that “no reasonable litigant could expect success on the merits,” and criticized Black Cube’s August 2025 affidavit as “self-serving.”

Despite multiple court orders, Black Cube allegedly continued to withhold key information and attempted to appeal to both the New Jersey Appellate Division and the New Jersey Supreme Court. Both appeals were ultimately rejected.

Identification of Playtech as the Client

Following these legal proceedings, Evolution confirmed that Playtech was the company behind the report. The company stated that it will amend its complaint to formally include Playtech as a defendant, signaling that litigation is expected to continue well into 2026.

Playtech plc responded by denying all allegations. The company described Evolution’s claims as “wholly untrue” and argued that they were “designed to distract from serious questions about Evolution’s business practices.”

Playtech acknowledged that its subsidiary, Playtech Software Limited, had commissioned an independent intelligence investigation. However, the company emphasized that the investigation’s purpose was to verify “credible and repeated concerns” raised by operators, suppliers, and regulators. Playtech maintained that the inquiry was conducted lawfully and focused solely on whether Evolution was active in prohibited or sanctioned markets.

Playtech’s Statement on Investigation

In an official statement, Playtech stated:

“The investigation was undertaken lawfully to better understand and verify concerns of significant regulatory and commercial importance.”

The company further added that the resulting report “evidences that Evolution’s business practices undermine lawful and compliant gambling operations.” Playtech affirmed that it “stands by the decision to commission the report” and expressed confidence that court examination of its findings would confirm the “credibility and legitimacy” of its investigation.

Implications for the B2B iGaming Market

This legal dispute highlights broader tensions within the B2B iGaming industry, where competition, compliance, and market reputation are critically important. Evolution, with its global network of studios across Europe, the Americas, and Asia, argued that the alleged smear campaign caused not only business disruption but also broader reputational harm to the regulated online gaming sector.

For Playtech, defending its actions centers on establishing that the investigation was carried out in good faith and in the interest of transparency. Both companies now face prolonged legal scrutiny, and the case is expected to have implications for how intelligence gathering, investigative reporting, and regulatory interactions are handled in the sector.

Future Litigation and Industry Watch

As litigation proceeds, both Evolution and Playtech continue to publicly defend their positions. Evolution plans to expand its claims against Playtech, and the courts will likely examine the extent to which investigative reporting or intelligence-gathering in a commercial context can be considered lawful or defamatory.

The case also emphasizes the importance of transparency, corporate governance, and ethical conduct in B2B relationships, particularly in highly regulated industries like iGaming. Legal experts suggest that the outcome of this dispute could serve as a precedent for future claims involving reputational damage, cross-border intelligence operations, and the accountability of private investigative firms in commercial disputes.

Conclusion

The Evolution versus Playtech dispute is one of the most high-profile conflicts in the online gaming sector in recent years. It reflects the increasing complexities of operating in a global, regulated market, where allegations of misconduct, competitive tensions, and reputational risks can escalate into multi-year legal battles.

While Evolution continues to assert that it was the victim of a calculated smear campaign, Playtech maintains that its investigation was lawful and aimed at verifying legitimate regulatory concerns. As the case progresses, it is likely to draw significant attention from both regulators and industry stakeholders worldwide.

FAQs

What is the main dispute between Evolution and Playtech?
Evolution alleges that Playtech commissioned a defamatory report via Black Cube, while Playtech denies these claims and cites regulatory concerns.

Who is Black Cube in this case?
Black Cube is a private intelligence firm allegedly hired by Playtech to conduct an investigation into Evolution’s business practices.

What were the accusations in the Black Cube report?
The report accused Evolution of operating in sanctioned markets and providing services to unlicensed operators, which Evolution calls fabricated.

How did Evolution respond to the report?
Evolution filed a defamation and trade libel lawsuit in the Superior Court of New Jersey in December 2021.

What were the findings of U.S. regulators?
The NJDGE and PGCB found no evidence of illegal betting or inappropriate payments by Evolution.

What did the court say about the Black Cube report?
The New Jersey Superior Court ruled the report “is not truthful” and that Evolution suffered damages as a result.

Has Playtech responded to the allegations?
Yes, Playtech denies all allegations, stating the investigation was lawful and addressed legitimate regulatory concerns.

What role did HeraldPR play?
HeraldPR was allegedly paid $10,000 to amplify the report’s findings in the media.

What are the broader implications for the iGaming industry?
The case highlights reputational, regulatory, and competitive risks in the B2B iGaming market and may set precedents for future disputes.

What is the current status of the litigation?
Evolution plans to amend its complaint to include Playtech, with legal proceedings expected to continue into 2026.