Gamma Law

10/09/2026

The biggest miss from this analysis 18 months ago: We assumed federal legislation would provide a national framework. It didn’t. The federal App Store Accountability Act passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee in March 2026 but never reached a floor vote. No federal uniformity. Instead, states have moved forward on their own, creating a patchwork of compliance obligations. https://buff.ly/JltVR3D

10/09/2026

Eighteen months ago, we published an analysis asking whether tech platforms could scale age verification without compromising privacy. We described the operational challenges, the technical limitations of document verification and facial recognition, and the constitutional concerns that seemed likely to emerge. The operational and technical analysis holds. The regulatory forecast needs correction. https://buff.ly/NN3OJZL

10/09/2026

The national security review was the big legal question when we wrote about this deal 18 months ago. It finally got approved, but it went down to the wire. The deal blew past its original June 30 closing deadline, and the parties had to extend. What nobody outside the room knows is whether the government attached conditions such as limits on who can access player data or source code. Those terms are rarely made public. https://buff.ly/lNtCAFs

10/08/2026

Six months ago, we published this article arguing that crypto mining had entered a new phase: regulatory clarity without reduced risk. We said legal exposure had become concentrated in securities disclosures, energy contracts, jurisdiction, and infrastructure strategy. The thesis largely holds, but the specifics need revision.

Are you operating a crypto mining business, or are you underwriting regulatory, contractual, and grid liability you haven't properly priced? That is the real issue facing serious operators today. The volatility of Bitcoin is familiar. The legal exposure embedded in modern mining structures is not.

10/08/2026

The USPTO's updated trademark guidance has an important implication for companies building NFT-based products: the NFT itself isn't the product and doesn't qualify for intellectual property protection.

The NFT is a certificate or authentication mechanism. The trademark application needs to identify the underlying good or service.
That means companies need to look beyond the technology and describe what the consumer receives.

For Web3 businesses, this distinction can affect how products are described across legal filings, websites, marketing materials, and technical documentation.

The USPTO imposes exacting identification requirements for Web3, gaming, and virtual media trademarks. Under TMEP § 1401.15(b), applicants cannot identify goods or services simply as "NFTs" or "virtual goods" because those terms do not describe recognizable items in commerce under the Trademark Act...

10/08/2026

California's SB 690 is now law, stripping private plaintiffs of the right to bring website or app "pen register" claims under C**A § 638.51. The bill applies retroactively to pending claims filed on or after January 1, 2025. For defendants facing active litigation under this theory, SB 690 offers direct statutory grounds to seek dismissal. Enforcement now shifts exclusively to the California AG. **ADefense

California Governor Newsom signed into law SB 690, a bill that would amend the California Invasion of Privacy Act (C**A) to provide relief for news publishe ...

10/08/2026

Many companies think about AI legal risk when a system goes live. But the risks begin much earlier.

Model selection, data planning, system architecture, vendor relationships, and governance decisions can all shape an organization's eventual exposure to intellectual property, privacy, confidentiality, contractual, regulatory, and liability risks.

Once AI becomes embedded in core operations, changing those decisions becomes much more difficult.

Artificial intelligence is becoming embedded in how modern enterprises create, distribute, and monetize products and services. As organizations move from experimenting with AI tools to integrating models into core business processes, the legal risks increasingly arise not from the technology alone,....

10/07/2026

The promise of AI in real-money gaming comes with a corresponding responsibility to manage risk.

Operators need to consider gambling law, privacy, data security, intellectual property, consumer protection, and transparency as interconnected elements of AI governance.

As AI becomes more deeply embedded in gaming, proactive compliance and regular risk assessment will be increasingly important.

AI and machine learning (ML) are transforming the real-money gaming industry, presenting new opportunities while raising the stakes for developers, platforms, and players alike.

10/07/2026

A year and a half ago, we wrote that the crypto casino market was growing fast while US law struggled to keep up. That's still accurate; crypto itself is legal, but whether crypto casinos are legal depends on a messy mix of federal ambiguity and state rules that have shifted quite a bit since then.

The global cryptocurrency casino market is projected to reach $65.7 billion by 2027, underscoring the increasing prominence of digital assets in the gaming industry. However, the legal landscape governing crypto casinos in the United States remains complex and fragmented.

10/07/2026

Update to what we covered a year ago: the push to reform Section 230 now has real courtroom backing. Juries in California and New Mexico have found Meta and YouTube negligent in social media addiction cases, and lawmakers pushing to sunset Section 230 have pointed directly to these verdicts as proof it's time to act. What was a legislative debate a year ago is now backed by actual legal outcomes.

Enacted in 1996, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is widely regarded as a foundational statute for the modern internet. Its central clause — only 26 words long —