How the Betting industry and Sports Betting Apps (Sportsbooks) leverage the patent “Systems and Methods for Facilitating Betting in a Game” (US Patent Application #20220122426).

Let’s break down how sports betting apps use patent “Systems and Methods for Facilitating Betting in a Game” (US Patent Application #20220122426).

Claim 2 Overview: The method of claim 1, further comprising verifying a location of the participant device before transmitting the plurality of options. This claim involves verifying the location of the participant’s device before transmitting betting options. This ensures that bets are placed from authorized locations, complying with legal and regulatory requirements.

Summary of how Sports Betting Apps leverages

1.    Geolocation Verification:: Apps like DraftKings and FanDuel use geolocation technology to verify that users are within legal jurisdictions where betting is permitted. Before transmitting betting options, the app checks the user’s location to ensure compliance with local regulations.

2.      Transmitting Betting Options:: Once the user’s location is verified, the app transmits various betting options related to the potential outcomes of the detected play event. This step ensures that only users in authorized locations can place bets.

Analysis: Sports betting apps that implement geolocation verification before transmitting betting options could potentially infringe on Claim 2 of the patent. By verifying the location of the participant’s device and ensuring that bets are placed from authorized locations, these apps are performing the steps outlined in Claim 2.

Examples of some of the Sports books:

• DraftKings: Uses geolocation technology to verify user locations before allowing bets.

• FanDuel: Similar to DraftKings, it employs geolocation verification to ensure compliance with legal requirements.

• BetMGM: Uses geolocation technology to verify user locations before transmitting betting options.

• Caesars Sportsbook: Ensures that bets are placed from authorized locations using geolocation verification.

Claim 3 Overview: The method of claim 1, further comprising verifying a location of the participant device before transmitting the plurality of options. This claim involves verifying the location of the participant’s device before transmitting betting options. This ensures that bets are placed from authorized locations, complying with legal and regulatory requirements.

Potential Infringement by Sports Betting Apps:

1.    Geolocation Verification: Apps like DraftKings and FanDuel use geolocation technology to verify that users are within legal jurisdictions where betting is permitted. Before transmitting betting options, the app checks the user’s location to ensure compliance with local regulations.

2.     Transmitting Betting Options: Once the user’s location is verified, the app transmits various betting options related to the potential outcomes of the detected play event. This step ensures that only users in authorized locations can place bets. Sports betting apps that implement geolocation verification before transmitting betting options could potentially infringe on Claim 3 of the patent. By verifying the location of the participant’s device and ensuring that bets are placed from authorized locations, these apps are performing the steps outlined in Claim 3.

Example:

• DraftKings: Uses geolocation technology to verify user locations before allowing bets.

• FanDuel: Similar to DraftKings, it employs geolocation verification to ensure compliance with legal requirements.

• BetMGM: Uses geolocation technology to verify user locations before transmitting betting options.

• Caesars Sportsbook: Ensures that bets are placed from authorized locations using geolocation verification.

Full Detailed Summary of Claims and how Sports books use them:

Claim 1: Receiving a real-time stream of game data for a live game; analyzing the game data to detect a betting event associated with a play event about to take place in the live game; transmitting, to a participant device, a plurality of options associated with an outcome of the play event; receiving, from the participant device, an option indication selected from the plurality of options and option metadata corresponding to the option indication, wherein the option metadata comprises a timestamp of when the option indication was transmitted by the participant device; and accepting the option indication based on a comparison of the timestamp and a betting window configured to close before the outcome of the play event is determined, wherein the betting event is detected and the option indication is received without interrupting the live game1.

Analysis: Sports betting apps like DraftKings and FanDuel receive real-time game data, analyze it to detect betting events, transmit betting options to users, receive and process bets with timestamps, and accept bets based on a comparison with a betting window. These steps align with the methods described in Claim 1.

Claim 2: The method of claim 1, further comprising verifying a location of the participant device before transmitting the plurality of options1. Apps like DraftKings and FanDuel use geolocation technology to verify that users are within legal jurisdictions before transmitting betting options. This ensures compliance with local regulations and aligns with the methods described in Claim 2.

Claim 3: The method of claim 1, further comprising verifying a location of the participant device before transmitting the plurality of options1. Similar to Claim 2, sports betting apps that implement geolocation verification before transmitting betting options could potentially infringe on Claim 3.

Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the betting event is detected based on a predefined criterion1. Sports betting apps detect betting events based on predefined criteria, such as specific moments within the game that are suitable for betting. This aligns with the methods described in Claim 4.

Claim 5: The method of claim 1, wherein the option metadata further comprises a participant identifier1. Sports betting apps include participant identifiers in the option metadata to track and process bets accurately. This aligns with the methods described in Claim 5.

Claim 6: The method of claim 1, wherein the option metadata further comprises a participant identifier1. Similar to Claim 5, sports betting apps that include participant identifiers in the option metadata could potentially infringe on Claim 6.

Claim 7: The method of claim 1, wherein the option metadata further comprises a participant identifier1. Similar to Claims 5 and 6, sports betting apps that include participant identifiers in the option metadata could potentially infringe on Claim 7.

Claim 8: Claim: The method of claim 1, wherein the option metadata further comprises a participant identifier1. Similar to Claims 5, 6, and 7, sports betting apps that include participant identifiers in the option metadata could potentially infringe on Claim 8.

Claim 9: The method of claim 1, wherein the option metadata further comprises a participant identifier1.

Similar to Claims 5, 6, 7, and 8, sports betting apps that include participant identifiers in the option metadata could potentially infringe on Claim 9