The Role of Responsibility in Safer Gambling: Insights from Operators and Regulators

Legal Framework: Contractual Obligations Without Duty of Care

Andy Danson, Partner at Bird & Bird, explained that the operator–player relationship is contractual, meaning operators are primarily accountable to regulators rather than directly to players. “Violating licensing conditions does not automatically give a player the right to claim compensation for losses in court,” he noted.

In most jurisdictions, there is no general duty of care toward players. Yet, industry practices are increasingly moving beyond what legislation requires, setting higher standards for protection.

What the Numbers Say: Diverging Perspectives

Player Responsibility

71% of operators believe players should take greater responsibility for safer gambling practices, with 14% strongly agreeing. Only 2% disagreed, making this the clearest consensus point.

Operator Responsibility

50% of respondents think operators should bear primary responsibility in ensuring safer gambling, though just 7% strongly agree. This gap suggests reluctance to fully commit to the obligations implied.

Regulator Responsibility

Similarly, 50% support regulators as the primary responsible party, but here 21% strongly agree. Regulators are seen as more natural leaders in promoting player responsibility and protection than operators themselves.

Overall, 96% of operators agree collaboration between operators and regulators is essential.

Spanish operator representative: “I would like to see the industry move toward more personalized and data-driven player education… education should be transparent, engaging, and easy to understand.”

Head of Compliance at a leading operator: “Move beyond generic messaging and focus on education that actually changes behavior.”

Legal Context: Shared, But Unequal

Brazil

Courts ruled that providing self-exclusion tools is insufficient; operators must proactively block compulsive players.

The Netherlands

Regulators require live interventions, such as phone or video calls, with players showing signs of problematic behavior.

Italy

Mandatory real-time behavioral monitoring with automatic alerts is now a licensing requirement.

President of a South American safer gambling campaign group: “We would like to see the industry move from performative compliance toward genuine commitment, embedding player education directly into the product experience.”

Tools and Their Effectiveness

Deposit limits are the most widely used tool (89% adoption), while cross-operator self-exclusion is considered the most effective (48.7% support). Self-assessment questionnaires, however, are seen as least effective, with 60% rating them ineffective or rarely effective.

This paradox highlights the challenge: players most in need of support are least likely to use protective tools.

Simon Westbury, Strategic Advisor at 1xBet, emphasized: “Safety is a three-way conversation between operators, regulators, and the players themselves… real safety only happens when we stop working in silos and start cooperating.”

Responsibility as a Business Strategy

69% of operators acknowledge that safer gambling leads to more profitable players in the long term. Investments in player protection are not just compliance costs but strategies for retention, lifetime value, and sustainability.

The International Player Safety Index Series shows consensus on collaboration, but no unity on leadership. Until players actively participate, shared responsibility remains incomplete.