Company adamant to prevent further leaks
SBTech is suing the state of Oregon and its biggest daily newspaper, The Oregonian, to stop the disclosure of the contract it has with the Oregon Lottery.
reportedly attempting to protect proprietary trade secrets
The global sports betting services and data provider has been adamant to prevent certain details of its contract from being made public. While a lot of the contract details have already been leaked, SBTech is reportedly attempting to protect proprietary trade secrets.
A statement from SBTech informed: “There is only a very small portion of the contract, containing SBTech’s pricing model, that SBTech would like to keep confidential, as that information constitutes company trade secrets.”
Last week, the company obtained a temporary restraining order against the newspaper and the Attorney General’s office to stop both parties from disclosing SBTech’s contract with the state lottery.
Legal action in the works
The state’s Attorney General, Ellen Rosenblum, had previously ordered the full disclosure of the contract between SBTech and the Oregon Lottery. This led to SBTech filing an extraordinary lawsuit against the news publication, its online site, the state, Rosenblum, and lottery director Barry Pack.
SBTech will once again appear in the Marion County Circuit Court today in an attempt to obtain a preliminary injunction from Judge David Leith. This would see that none of the parties involved in this legal action are able to release the details of this contract until a court issues a binding, final ruling on the case.
With litigation pending, the attorney general will not be commenting on the matter. The inclusion of the state lottery in this suit is merely standard procedure.
Sports betting in Oregon
Sports betting has been live in Oregon since October 2019 through the Scoreboard mobile betting app. Some of the tribal casinos in the state have open retail sportsbooks.
The awarding of the sports betting contract to SBTech sparked controversy in the state. The non-competitive process saw the authorities consider proposals from only a handful of operators.
Petitioners in the case requested visibility of the details of the payments and fees SBTech would receive for its contract in Oregon. Agreements between vendors and public agencies in the state are normally made public as they involve the spending of public funds.