Skillz Platform Inc. v. Voodoo SAS, 2026 WL 717220, No. 24-CV-4991
(VSB) (JW) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2026)

Skillz sought an injunction against defendants’ allegedly
false representations about not using bots, and against defendants’ use of bots,
in their gaming applications. Skillz has showed up before litigating against
other gaming companies’ bot-related representations. Its games including those
where players can compete to win cash prizes in head-to-head, skill-bracketed
tournaments that ban bots. Defendants run similar games and advertise
themselves as, e.g., “fair” and “skill-based” games that are played against
“real players” with “no bots allowed.”

The magistrate recommended against an injunction solely on
grounds of delay. The relevant date for measuring delay was not the filing of
the initial complaint, but at the time Skillz learned of the alleged harm. Even
after filing, it waited seven weeks to move for a preliminary injunction.
Without more evidence about when it first learned of the bot use, this
“undercuts the sense of urgency that ordinarily accompanies a motion for
preliminary relief and suggests that there is, in fact, no irreparable injury.”

In addition, the claims of irreparable injury were too
remote and speculative to justify emergency relief. Although the parties do compete,
Skillz didn’t show a logical causal connection between the alleged false
advertising and (1) its own sales position or (2) the overall cash gaming
market.

Skillz showed that its sales and market share decreased
since 2021, but not that the alleged false advertising played any role in that
beyond unsupported speculation by a self-serving declaration. So too with harm
to the overall market. “Courts in this circuit have frequently rejected such
speculative arguments in deciding whether to issue a preliminary injunction.”
[Now do trademark infringement!]

Without evidence of harm to Skillz’ own reputation, as
opposed to allegations that distrust was harming the overall market, money
damages could redress any injury.

from Blogger https://tushnet.blogspot.com/2026/04/delay-still-defeats-lanham-act.html