Judge Fláviah Lançoni Costa Pinheiro, of the Court of Justice of Goiás in Brazil, partially granted the request for a precautionary measure in a public civil action filed by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Goiás and ordered that the defendant companies include mandatory warnings about the risks of gambling on their digital platforms.
Read also: South Dakota moves toward online sports betting with state Senate approval
In the decision, the magistrate established that, within 15 days, the defendants must insert, in a prominent place on the main page of their websites and applications, the following warning: “Attention: Gambling can cause pathological addiction (Problem Gambling), anxiety disorders, depression, and lead to over-indebtedness. Play responsibly. Prohibited for persons under 18 years of age.”
In case of non-compliance, a daily fine of 10,000 reais per company was set, equivalent to approximately $1,650, with a maximum limit of 500,000 reais, which represents about $82,500. This economic sanction seeks to ensure the effective compliance with the precautionary measure ordered by the court.
The judicial resolution represents a significant precedent in Brazil regarding the responsibility of betting platforms in preventing problems associated with compulsive gambling and excessive user indebtedness.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office of Goiás’s civil action against betting operators
The Public Prosecutor’s Office of Goiás filed 13 public civil actions against 251 betting companies, with approximately 20 companies included in each action, under the justification of preventing damages related to problem gambling and over-indebtedness. According to the lawsuit, the operators would be in breach of the Consumer Defense Code by not presenting adequate warnings about the psychological, financial, and social risks associated with online betting.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office based the actions on technical studies from the Regional Council of Medicine of Goiás and the Federal Council of Psychology, and used economic data from the Central Bank of Brazil and Itaú Unibanco, which indicate economic impacts and an increase in the indebtedness of the Brazilian population as a consequence of online betting.
In the document, the body stated that it had found that betting companies were constantly exposing consumers to risks by promoting games that encourage deposits with the expectation of winning based on luck, without due warning about possible negative consequences, such as addiction, over-indebtedness, and psychological disorders.
Comparison of gambling with the marketing of medicines
The supervisory body compared the activity of betting with the marketing of medicines, arguing that, just as a pharmacy must provide a leaflet with complete information about risks, the product offered, in this case gambling, should also clearly present all possible harmful implications of its use.
Read also: Colombia studies reform of gambling tax to finance climate emergency
This analogy seeks to establish a parallel between products that require mandatory health warnings and betting platforms, which, according to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, should also transparently inform about their potential risks to users’ mental and financial health.
In the section titled “On the precautionary measure of anticipation of the effects of the injunction,” the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Goiás highlighted that the legal requirements for granting an urgent measure before the final decision of the process are met. The body maintained that there is relevance in the grounds of the action and a risk that judicial delay would render the final resolution ineffective, especially given the need to guarantee consumers access to clear information about the risks and consequences of online betting.
“Therefore, since the consumer is the fragile and vulnerable party in this gambling context, who exposes themselves to risk in pursuit of easy money and the consequent triggering of addictions, there is no alternative but to resort to the Judiciary to protect their rights,” the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Goiás defended in its reasoning.
Debate on the effectiveness of mandatory warnings
The industry’s position raises a debate about the effectiveness of standardized warnings versus comprehensive prevention policies. On one hand, the Public Prosecutor’s Office argues that consumers have the right to clear information about risks before making decisions about gambling. On the other hand, regulated operators maintain that they already comply with strict responsible gaming requirements established by the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting.
Proponents of stricter measures point out that, regardless of existing regulation, visible warnings on platforms can serve as a constant reminder of the risks associated with gambling, similar to what happens with warnings on tobacco or alcohol products.
However, critics of this approach argue that true consumer protection requires more sophisticated tools, such as customizable deposit limits, effective self-exclusion systems, early detection algorithms for problematic behavior, and financial education programs.
Read also: Brazil reinforces control over sports transfers: Ministry can block funds in 48 hours
