There is a delicate balance within the online casino industry in order to maintain a respectable marketing practice while not crossing the boundary of exploiting the addictive nature within certain individuals. One unlikely recipient of some not-so-favorable accusations dealing with potential irresponsible marketing practices is the state-run online casino Oy Veikkaus in Finland.

Oy Veikkaus was first challenged by the well-known Ladbrokes back in 2003, via a lawsuit in response to Ladbrokes' rejection for an online casino license in Finland. The court called an appeal to the rejection, on the basis that the government had cited the Gaming Act as the reason for the rejection, as opposed to Ladbrokes claim that the rejection stemmed from a monopoly violation under the European Union rules of free movement of services.

The second appeal of the Ladbrokes application was rejected in 2005, at which time the courts ruled that Finland's choice to maintain a state-run online casino, while rejecting others like Ladbrokes, did not constitute a monopoly. So long as the Finnish government was non-discriminatory in keeping with the objective of preserving public, the courts ruled that Ladbrokes rejection was in the government's domain.

The Supreme Administrative Court does, however, conceded that the current Finnish online casino is not meeting proper standards of addiction prevention in the use of its marketing. Some of the things that the Supreme Administrative Court is suggesting to the Finnish gaming site is to strictly enforce that no players under the age of eighteen be allowed to play, while simultaneously refocusing their advertising and marketing away from the underage demographic.