Online Gambling Offences In Finland
Online Gambling Offences in Finland: Case-Law Analysis
Legal Background
Finland has a state gambling monopoly managed by Veikkaus Oy.
Gambling outside the monopoly (unlicensed operators, foreign operators targeting Finns) is illegal, including online casinos, poker sites, and other gambling services.
The Lotteries Act (Act 1047/2001) governs gambling. Violations include:
Operating gambling without license
Marketing gambling illegally (especially to minors)
Providing platforms or links to unlicensed gambling
Enforcement is carried out mainly by the National Police Board (NPB) via prohibition orders and conditional fines. Courts, including Administrative Courts and the Supreme Administrative Court, review these decisions.
1. Supreme Administrative Court – Fantasy Sports Case
Facts:
A media company organized a fantasy sports game where participants paid an entry fee and won cash prizes based on real-life sports performance. The game was skill-based, but outcomes could be influenced by chance events like injuries.
Legal Issue:
Whether fantasy sports with monetary prizes fall under the definition of gambling according to the Lotteries Act.
Decision:
The Supreme Administrative Court ruled that even though skill plays a role, chance factors are sufficient to classify the activity as gambling. The company’s activity violated Finland’s monopoly law.
Significance:
Fantasy sports games with cash prizes are considered gambling if chance factors are involved.
Reinforces Veikkaus’ exclusive rights.
Sets a precedent for other skill-based online games with monetary rewards.
2. Veikkaus Advertising to Minors
Facts:
Veikkaus ran gambling advertisements on TV during programs targeting minors, including family shows and weekend cartoons.
Legal Issue:
Marketing gambling to minors is prohibited under the Lotteries Act.
Decision:
The NPB imposed a conditional fine of €2.9 million on Veikkaus and issued a prohibition order to stop such advertising.
Significance:
Even the monopoly operator must comply with age-restriction rules.
Highlights the Finnish regulator’s seriousness in protecting minors.
Demonstrates that repeated violations lead to substantial fines.
3. Social Media Influencer Marketing Case – Twitch/YouTube
Facts:
An influencer promoted offshore gambling websites via Twitch and YouTube, linking to foreign gambling operators accessible by Finnish residents.
Legal Issue:
Third-party marketing of unlicensed gambling services is illegal in Finland. Does influencer promotion count as marketing?
Decision:
The NPB issued a prohibition order and a conditional fine of €33,000.
The Helsinki Administrative Court upheld the decision.
Influencer activity, including indirect promotion (logos, links, livestreams), constitutes illegal marketing.
Significance:
Establishes that affiliate or influencer marketing is regulated.
Indirect promotion targeting Finnish audiences is punishable.
Sent a warning to other online content creators.
4. Additional Influencer Marketing Cases (2025)
Facts:
Two other influencers promoted foreign gambling platforms via social media and streaming channels.
Legal Issue:
Similar to the previous case: unlawful marketing targeting Finland.
Decision:
NPB imposed conditional fines of €30,000 each and prohibited further promotional activities.
In one case, the fine was enforced; in the other, the decision was appealed, temporarily suspending enforcement.
Significance:
Confirms consistent enforcement patterns.
Shows regulators actively monitor cross-border digital marketing.
Strengthens legal clarity that Finnish law applies to influencers even abroad if content reaches Finnish consumers.
5. Eurosport Cross-Border Advertising Case
Facts:
Eurosport, broadcasting from abroad, aired gambling ads targeting Finland from foreign operators.
Legal Issue:
Does Finland have the right to restrict gambling advertisements broadcast from other EU countries under EU law?
Decision:
The Helsinki Administrative Court initially overturned NPB’s ban citing EU broadcasting freedom.
The Supreme Administrative Court later clarified that Finland can restrict gambling ads for public interest reasons, including protection of minors.
Significance:
Confirms Finland’s regulatory powers over cross-border gambling advertising.
Balances EU law with domestic public policy.
Supports the enforcement of monopoly and anti-gambling marketing rules even against foreign operators.
6. Gammix Foreign Operator Investigation
Facts:
The NPB investigated Malta-based Gammix, which marketed gambling to Finnish residents via affiliate websites and social media.
Legal Issue:
Marketing of unlicensed gambling services to Finnish consumers is prohibited.
Decision/Action:
The NPB threatened fines and ordered removal of all targeted marketing.
Enforcement included payment blocking mechanisms to prevent transactions to the foreign operator.
Significance:
Shows that Finnish authorities actively pursue foreign operators targeting Finland.
Illustrates the use of technical enforcement tools (payment blocking) in addition to fines.
Demonstrates Finland’s strict monopoly enforcement in the digital space.
Key Takeaways Across Cases
Marketing is the main target of enforcement: influencers, foreign operators, TV channels, and even Veikkaus itself.
Chance element matters: skill-based games with money prizes may still be considered gambling.
Conditional fines and prohibition orders are the standard enforcement tools.
Cross-border enforcement is possible if Finnish audiences are targeted.
Regulatory vigilance is high, with multiple similar cases showing a clear enforcement trend.
RELATED Blog
comments