Swedish Court Lowers Sanction Fee for Hacksaw Studios

Swedish Court Lowers Sanction Fee for Hacksaw Studios

Hacksaw Gaming

Rated 95.07/100%

439 Casinos | 186 Games

All Casinos

Number of games

186

Country

Malta

Founded

2018

• Scratchcards
• Slots
• Tournaments

A legal dispute between game developer Hacksaw Studios and the Swedish Gambling Authority has concluded with a revised sanction that sheds light on developers' challenges in controlling how their content is distributed. The case, which centered on the appearance of Hacksaw's games on unauthorized websites, resulted in a sharply reduced penalty after the Swedish Administrative Courts reviewed the circumstances surrounding the breach.

In early 2024, Spelinspektionen reported that several online platforms, not licensed to operate in Sweden, had offered titles developed by Hacksaw Studios. The regulator identified this as a breach of the Swedish Gambling Act, which requires all gambling services to be offered through licensed entities. In response to this breach, Spelinspektionen issued a sanction fee of SEK 2.6 million, citing the developer's indirect involvement in allowing access to regulated content through unauthorized channels.

Hacksaw Studios disputed the size of the penalty, presenting a defense that centered on its use of geoblocking tools. According to the company, these systems are designed to prevent end-users in restricted jurisdictions from interacting with their software, regardless of whether the games are made available through third parties. The developer argued that the presence of its content on illegal platforms does not imply direct fault, particularly when preventive systems are already in place.

The case advanced to the Administrative Courts, where both parties presented their positions. Hacksaw Studios noted that while content distribution agreements typically contain jurisdictional clauses, developers are limited in controlling operator behavior after licensed software. Moreover, the company emphasized that total oversight of downstream distribution is not feasible, particularly in a global market where content may be redistributed through unauthorized means.

The Courts acknowledged these complexities but upheld that a violation had occurred under Swedish law. The ruling stated that the Gambling Act remains applicable even in cases where content appears on unlicensed platforms without direct intent or cooperation from the developer. At the same time, the court recognized that Hacksaw Studios had taken action before the investigation began, including implementing geoblocking and cooperating with authorities. As a result, the initial fine was reduced from SEK 2.6 million to SEK 20,000, approximately $2,037, accompanied by a formal warning.

This case highlights a recurring issue in the online gambling sector—the balance of responsibility between game developers and operators regarding compliance with national regulations. Developers create and license content, but its final placement and accessibility can sometimes fall outside their control, especially in jurisdictions where regulatory enforcement is fragmented or inconsistent.

The implications extend beyond the specifics of the ruling. As online casino platforms expand globally, and software providers increasingly enter multiple markets through intermediary partnerships, oversight becomes more complicated. Developers may find themselves accountable for content availability on third-party websites even when they have not sanctioned such use directly. This introduces risk not just from a legal standpoint but also reputationally, as enforcement actions can attract scrutiny from other jurisdictions.

For suppliers operating in regulated environments, this outcome signals that mitigation measures such as geoblocking may be considered during investigations but do not entirely eliminate the possibility of regulatory action. Developers might be encouraged to reassess the effectiveness of their compliance protocols—not only at the point of distribution but also in monitoring how and where their content surfaces over time.

The ruling also suggests that regulators adopt a more layered view of liability. While intent and cooperation may influence the severity of sanctions, developers are still expected to demonstrate proactive strategies to restrict access in markets where their partners lack appropriate licenses. This expectation may shift how supplier contracts are structured, potentially placing more responsibility on operators to comply with distribution terms and establishing clearer procedures for breach remediation.

Operators, too, may face greater scrutiny over how they source and implement third-party content. As regulators focus more on tracing the origins of games offered on unlicensed platforms, there may be broader industry pressure to ensure tighter control over who is authorized to deploy and promote specific titles.

Although Hacksaw Studios avoided the full weight of the original fine, the legal process itself underscores the difficulty of maintaining strict regulatory alignment in a fragmented market. The Swedish court's approach—balancing recognition of mitigating steps with confirmation of a breach—reflects a practical stance likely to influence similar cases elsewhere.

The online casino sector operates in an environment where jurisdictions differ not only in how they define violations but also in how they enforce them. This case illustrates the legal and operational consequences that may follow when content appears on platforms not aligned with national laws, even without direct distribution agreements.