Thaibet Provides Details on New Jersey Suit Settlement

Toronto, ON – In response to investors seeking additional information regarding this positive development, CryptoLogic Inc., a leading software supplier to the Internet gaming and e-commerce industries, is pleased to provide further detail of the settlement between CryptoLogic and WagerLogic, its wholly-owned subsidiary, and the New Jersey Divisions of Gaming Enforcement and Consumer Affairs with respect to the civil action filed on October 16, 2001.

The following is the complete text of the settlement agreement.

WHEREAS, as of the 23rd day of April, 2002, plaintiff, State of New Jersey and defendants, (as domain name only), Intertainet Overseas Licensing Limited (now known as WagerLogic Limited), Paris Lenas, Alex Specogna, and CryptoLogic, Inc., having agreed to amicably settle the litigation styled as State of New Jersey v., CCMH Ltd., Intertainet Overseas Licensing Limited, Paris Lenas, Alex Specogna, CryptoLogic, Inc., Docket No. MER-C-161-01;

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and detriments contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

The following terms shall be defined in the following manner in this Agreement:

“State” refers to the State of New Jersey, the plaintiff herein.

“WagerLogic” refers to WagerLogic, Ltd., the entity formerly known as Intertainet Overseas Licensing Limited, a defendant in this action.

“Cryptologic” refers to defendant CryptoLogic, Inc.

“Lenas” refers to defendant Paris Lenas.

“Specogna” refers to defendant Alex Specogna.

“Complaint” refers to the Complaint dated October 16, 2001 in the matter captioned above.

“Settling Defendants” refers collectively to (as to domain name only), WagerLogic Limited (formerly Intertainet Overseas Licensing Limited), Paris Lenas, Alex Specogna and CryptoLogic, Inc.

The Settling Defendants acknowledge that the Superior Court of New Jersey properly has jurisdiction over this matter and further acknowledge that service of the summons and Complaint upon the Settling Defendants was proper.

CryptoLogic and WagerLogic represent that they do not presently own or operate any Thaibet sports betting websites. CryptoLogic and WagerLogic further represent that they do not license or distribute any sports betting internet software.

WagerLogic and CryptoLogic represent that they have caused the following entities, which are licensees of WagerLogic, to advise that they will not accept internet sports betting wagers from persons located within New Jersey:

Caribbean Casino Management Holdings, Limited (websites under the URLs:;;;;; and;

Safari Casino N. V. (; N.V. (; and

William Hill Casino N.V. (

WagerLogic and CryptoLogic further represent that they will use their best efforts to prevent their current customers and/or licensees from accepting nternet sports bets from persons located within New Jersey, unless and until it becomes legal to do so.

WagerLogic and CryptoLogic agree that any licensing or related agreements they may enter into in the future will contain a provision prohibiting the licensee or other entity or individual with which WagerLogic or CryptoLogic contracts, from accepting sports bets from persons located within New Jersey, unless and until it becomes legal to do so.

By entering into this Agreement, defendants neither make nor imply any admission as to any liability with respect to any claim alleged by or on behalf of the State. Defendants do not concede and expressly deny that they have violated any law, statute, ordinance, contract, duty or obligation whatsoever. The State agrees not to prosecute any of the Settling Defendants in connection with any of the alleged violations set forth in the Complaint.

The State represents that it has no other charge, claim or complaint of any kind pending against the Settling Defendants, or any of them. The State agrees that it will not bring any action or suit against the Settling Defendants, or any of them, concerning matters of the nature alleged in the Complaint, which are generally characterized as sports wagering transactions, based on any claims which arose prior to the date of this Agreement. However, any party may bring an action to enforce this Agreement.

The parties agree to execute and file with the Court a Stipulation of Dismissal with prejudice in the action styled above. Simultaneously with the execution of this Settlement Agreement, the State will execute a Stipulation of Dismissal, with prejudice and without costs, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.

The parties to this Agreement acknowledge that each party had counsel and that the Agreement has been mutually negotiated between the parties and was drafted by the Settling Defendants as a matter of convenience only. Therefore, no party shall be deemed to be the drafter of this Agreement if any issue is raised with respect to its interpretation.

This Settlement Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties, and supercedes any prior or other agreements, understandings or communications, written or oral.

This Settlement Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which shall constitute one in the same Settlement Agreement.

The parties to this Settlement Agreement agree that they shall execute, acknowledge and deliver any and all other instruments or documents which are reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Settlement Agreement.

This Settlement Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New Jersey.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed the Settlement Agreement as of the date set forth above.

You may also like

Read More