Updated: The NYC Marathon Class Action Lawsuit: Avoiding the Risks of Running an Illegal Lottery | Practical Law

Updated: The NYC Marathon Class Action Lawsuit: Avoiding the Risks of Running an Illegal Lottery | Practical Law

A recent class action complaint against New York Road Runners, Inc. (NYRR), the organizer and operator of the New York City Marathon, should cause consumer-facing businesses to review their sweepstakes and contests to ensure that their promotions comply with laws prohibiting private lotteries. This legal update offers practical tips to help businesses plan promotions and comply with federal and state laws.

Updated: The NYC Marathon Class Action Lawsuit: Avoiding the Risks of Running an Illegal Lottery

by Practical Law Commercial Transactions
Law stated as of 16 Sep 2016New York, USA (National/Federal)
A recent class action complaint against New York Road Runners, Inc. (NYRR), the organizer and operator of the New York City Marathon, should cause consumer-facing businesses to review their sweepstakes and contests to ensure that their promotions comply with laws prohibiting private lotteries. This legal update offers practical tips to help businesses plan promotions and comply with federal and state laws.
On September 9, 2016, NYRR entered into a settlement agreement with two of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit. This article has been updated to reflect the settlement.
Sales promotions, such as sweepstakes and contests, can be an important marketing tool for many businesses. Promotions can increase sales by growing brand awareness and creating incentives for consumers to buy products. While these promotions can be a smart marketing option, they also come with legal hurdles that can create extensive liabilities for companies (see Practice Note, Sales Promotions, Contests and Sweepstakes: Regulatory Framework). For example, a court might determine that a sweepstakes is in fact a private lottery, which is generally illegal in most states.
A class action recently filed against New York Road Runners, Inc. (NYRR), the organizer and operator of the New York City Marathon, illustrates these legal hurdles and should encourage businesses to review their own sweepstakes and contests to ensure they comply with federal and state laws prohibiting private lotteries (Konopa v. New York Road Runners, Inc., 1:16-cv-00450-KBF (S.D.N.Y 2016)).
This legal update includes practical tips and resources to help businesses plan promotions and comply with federal and state laws.

The NYC Marathon Class Action

On January 21, 2016, Charles Konopa and Matthew Clark filed a class action lawsuit against NYRR for allegedly violating New York's law against privately operated lotteries. Like most states, New York prohibits private lotteries, which include any promotion with the following three elements:
  • Consideration. The players pay or agree to pay something of value to participate in the promotion.
  • Chance. The winner is chosen by a drawing or some other method based on chance.
  • A prize. The winner receives something of value.
The plaintiffs specifically alleged that NYRR violated New York's law against lotteries by charging prospective runners a non-refundable, $11 processing fee to enter a random, chance-based drawing to run in the NYC Marathon.
As part of this class action, the plaintiffs have requested that NYRR:
  • Pay over $10 million in statutory damages to members of the proposed class.
  • Be enjoined from using this particular method of choosing marathon participants unless it complies with applicable New York state gaming laws.
  • Be ordered to pay additional fees and expenses in this action, including attorney and expert fees.
NYRR is not the first major organization to face recent allegations that it is operating an illegal lottery based on how it structures its promotion. In 2015, the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), the company that organizes and promotes Ironman triathlons, agreed to forfeit almost $3 million in lottery proceeds to the US government (see DOJ: World Triathlon Corporation (Ironman) Forfeits More Than $2.7 Million in Lottery Proceeds). The Department of Justice alleged that WTC held private lotteries prohibited by Florida law (Fla. Stat. § 849.09) and violated the Illegal Gambling Business Act (18 U.S.C. § 1955). The specific terms of the lotteries varied, but in each case WTC charged certain athletes $50 for the chance to be randomly selected to compete in the Ironman World Championship. The government stated that WTC was permitted to give away the chance to participate in the competition, but violated the law when it charged athletes money for the chance to win.

Running a Legal Sweepstake or Contest

Many companies rely on sweepstakes (a promotion in which prizes are awarded based on chance) and contests (a promotion in which prizes are awarded based on skill) to encourage consumers to interact with their brands. However, as the NYRR and Ironman cases demonstrate, companies must be careful not to structure these promotions as illegal lotteries.
If a business is running a sales promotion in which it offers a prize, the business should structure the promotion so that it does not include all three elements of a lottery (consideration, chance, and a prize) by either:

Removing the Element of Chance

In a properly structured contest, there should be no element of chance and the outcome of the contest should depend on skill. Because there is no element of chance, businesses can generally require participants to buy a product, pay to enter the contest, or offer some other form of consideration.
To ensure that a contest is skill-based, a business should:
  • Establish objective judging criteria.
  • Communicate the criteria to the entrants before they enter.
  • Use judges who are qualified to employ the criteria and ensure that they evaluate all entries using the criteria.
  • Break any ties on the basis of skill or award duplicate prizes.

Negating Consideration

As the NYRR and Ironman cases illustrate, charging consumers a required fee to enter a promotion can lead to claims that the company has organized an illegal lottery. If a business includes an entrance fee for a sales promotion, it can negate the consideration requirement by including a free alternate method of entry.
However, for a free method of entry to negate a consideration requirement, a business must treat entries submitted through the free method the same as it treats entries submitted through a paid method. To effectively negate the consideration requirement, a business should:
  • Clearly and conspicuously disclose the free method of entry.
  • Allow consumers to enter the promotion as many times for free as they can by making a purchase or payment.
  • Give consumers the same amount of time to enter for free as they have by making a purchase or payment.
  • Not create separate prize pools for purchase entries and non-purchase entries.

Additional Considerations

In addition to lottery concerns, businesses should ensure that their sweepstakes and contests:
  • Include official rules that disclose the promotion's material terms, such as:
    • who is eligible to participate;
    • entry instructions;
    • how winners are selected; and
    • a description of the prizes available.
  • Include provisions in the contest rules to protect against liability, such as:
    • the right to cancel or modify the promotion;
    • a provision to release the company from and against any claim associated with the promotion;
    • a limitation of liability provision;
    • the right to substitute any prize with another prize of equal or greater value; and
    • a forum selection provision.
  • Comply with general advertising laws, which prohibit false or misleading statements and require adequate disclaimers.
For more detailed information on operating sales promotions, see Practice Note, Running a Sweepstakes or Contest in the US.
For more information on general advertising standards, see Practice Notes, Advertising: Overview and Advertising and Promotions in Social Media.

Update

On September 9, 2016, NYRR entered into a settlement agreement with two of the plaintiffs in this suit. The settlement requires NYRR to:
  • Pay each named plaintiff $2,500.
  • Pay attorney's fees and expenses of up to $670,000.
  • Donate $100,000 to the NY City Parks Foundation.
  • Refrain from charging drawing-related fees for three years.
  • Provide designated race credits to certain unsuccessful entrants.