Rome court ruling revives debate over confusingly similar online gaming domains
A ruling issued by the Court of Rome on 28 April 2026 has underlined the central role of trademarks and domain names in Italy’s online gambling market, where operators’ digital identity has become an increasingly sensitive asset, including from a legal perspective, according to Jamma, an online daily specialising in the public gambling sector.
The case concerns a dispute among active Italian online gambling operators Bgame, Sport Network, and E-Play24 Ita Limited over the use of the “Begame Star” sign and several related domains. According to the reconstruction published by the news website, the specialised business section of the Court of Rome partially upheld Bgame’s claims, finding that the use of the contested trademark and domains could create a risk of confusion with the sign “bgame”.
Case involving Bgame, Sport Network and E-Play24
The central issue does not concern only the similarity between two trading names. In the online gaming sector, a domain is not simply a technical address. It is often the first point of contact between the operator and the user. It contributes to brand recognition and can affect perceptions of the platform’s reliability.
As reported by the news website, the Court of Rome found that the domains “begamestar.it” and “begamestar.sport” were too similar to “bgame.it” on phonetic, visual, and conceptual grounds. In particular, the element “begame” was considered capable of evoking the sign “bgame”, also because the parties operated in the same sector, offering betting and online casino services. According to the Court, the addition of the word “Star” was not sufficient to rule out the risk of confusion or commercial association between the different platforms.
Why the decision matters for the Italian market
The decision is also significant in the Italian regulatory context. In a sector marked by the ban on advertising games and betting introduced by Article 9 of the Dignity Decree, an operator’s recognisability through its name, domain, and digital presence has taken on even greater weight.
Against this backdrop, the way an operator presents itself online becomes even more important. A platform’s name, domain, and graphic identity do not serve only to distinguish it in the market. They can also affect the risk that a user may associate two services with the same commercial entity.
Weak trademark, but still protectable
One interesting aspect of the ruling concerns the nature of the Bgame trademark. The Court reportedly rejected challenges to its validity, while recognising the presence of the element “game”, a widely used descriptive term in the sector. The trademark was therefore considered protectable, but with limited distinctiveness. This distinction is relevant: a “weak” trademark can still be protected, but it enjoys narrower protection than a highly distinctive sign.
In practice, competitors may have greater scope to use similar variants or combinations, provided the overall impression does not create confusion among the public.
Contested domains blocked, but no damages awarded
In this specific case, the Court of Rome is said to have distinguished between some later graphic versions, considered sufficiently differentiated, and the contested use of the sign “Begame Star” and the related domains. For the latter, it reportedly ordered the cessation of use and transfer in favour of Bgame, with a penalty of €500 for any breaches or delays in complying with the order.
However, no damages were awarded. According to the news website, Bgame had not provided sufficient evidence of concrete economic damage directly linked to the use of the contested signs.
A signal for operators
Beyond the outcome of the dispute, the case shows how central trademarks and domains have become in online gaming. In a market such as Italy, where advertising is heavily restricted, an operator’s digital recognisability takes on even greater value.
The issue, therefore, is not only the similarity between two names, but also the risk that a user may associate different platforms with the same commercial entity. For operators, the most practical consequence may be greater attention to preventive measures when choosing names, domains, and visual identity.
The Court of Rome’s decision can be read as a significant signal for operators: in online gambling, brand protection is no longer solely a marketing issue but also one of positioning, trust, and business continuity.
This article was originally published on the Italian SiGMA News page on 16 June 2026.
Stay ahead with the stories driving global iGaming. Select SiGMA World as your source preference for exclusive voices, betting trends, prediction markets and key regulatory updates.
