Drake and streamer Adin Ross are the target of a federal class-action suit filed in Virginia, accusing them of organised racketeering (RICO) via the Stake.us platform.
A new class action has been filed in federal court in Virginia. It not only attacks the legality of Stake.us, but also accuses Drake and Adin Ross of alleged racketeering and fraud on a massive scale.
Sweepstakes model in the dock
At the heart of the dispute is the dual currency mechanism used by Stake.us to operate in the United States. Unlike a traditional online casino (banned in most States), Stake.us presents itself as a “sweepstakes” platform.
To participate, players buy Gold Coins (a virtual currency) with no real value. Each time they buy Gold Coins, they receive bonus Stake Cash. This virtual currency can then be wagered and exchanged for real cryptocurrency.
The plaintiffs, two Virginia residents who have suffered financial losses, argue that this structure is a smokescreen. In their view, Stake.us operates as a de facto illegal casino, disguising real-money wagers under complex legal terms to circumvent state prohibitions.
The RICO charge: money laundering and click farms
What distinguishes this case from previous ones is the invocation of the federal RICO Act (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), a law originally designed to combat the Mafia.
The complaint alleges that Stake’s ‘tipping’ functionality served as a hidden financial channel. Drake, Adin Ross and an Australian-based associate allegedly used the system to move funds outside of traditional banking controls.
The most explosive accusation concerns the alleged destination of these funds. They were allegedly redirected to fund artificial streaming operations, using bots and click farms to artificially inflate Drake’s listening figures on music streaming platforms.
If proven, these allegations would directly link unregulated gambling revenues to manipulation of music industry algorithms, setting a devastating legal precedent for the artist.
The role of influencers: From promotion to complicity?
Adin Ross, a controversial figure in Kick streaming, is described as a key partner in this strategy.
His livestreams, showing high-stakes gaming sessions, are accused of :
- Trivialising risk: By presenting massive winnings often financed by the platform itself.
- Targeting young people: By converting a young, impressionable audience into active players.
- Creating a false perception: By minimising the risks of addiction and real financial losses.
The plaintiffs argued that these actions were not mere advertising, but active participation in an illegal enterprise.