Australia Poker Chip Sites Draw AU$24.24m Federal Court Penalty
Australia’s online poker ban has again been enforced against a model built around virtual chips rather than direct cash tables. The services, operating as PPPfish, Shuffle Gaming, and Redraw Poker, allowed Australians to play poker against others using virtual chips.
The question for the court was about the money trail. These chips could be purchased and later sold for real money. That was enough for the court to treat the services as prohibited interactive gambling in Australia.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) initiated proceedings in April 2022. Brisbane Poker Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the highest penalty, AU$15 million. Rhys Edward Jones was ordered to pay AU$9 million, while Brenton Lee Buttigieg was ordered to pay AU$240,000.
How the Chip Model Came Under Scrutiny
The dispute was not about a traditional online casino lobby. Rather, it centered on peer-to-peer poker and how the flow of value worked within the system.
Players used virtual chips that could be purchased and later sold for real money. For the court, the label did not change how the services worked. The services still offered prohibited online poker to Australians.
ACMA had already obtained findings in November 2025 that Brisbane Poker and Jones provided prohibited interactive gambling services under section 15(2A) of the Interactive Gambling Act. Alongside fines, the latest orders impose additional restrictions on the operators.
Jones is restrained from offering a prohibited interactive gambling service for five years. Meanwhile, Buttigieg is restrained from aiding or abetting the provision of such a service for the same period. In addition, both Jones and Brisbane Poker must pay ACMA’s legal costs.
Earlier Penalty Raises Total Sanctions
The new Federal Court orders follow a previous AU$5 million fine on Diverse Link Pty Ltd in March 2023. The total fines in the larger case have reached AU$29.24 million.
This provides the regulatory body with a clearer benchmark for its decisions in future poker cases. It also matters for products that blur the line between social gaming language and real-money gambling.
Offering online poker to people in Australia remains prohibited under the Interactive Gambling Act 2001. Licensed wagering can operate under Australia’s regulated framework, while online casino-style services such as poker remain banned.
What the Case Means
The decision leaves little room for operators trying to present their real-money poker offering as a virtual-chip game or a social product. The court examined the offering from the functional perspective.
For promoters, the Buttigieg penalty is the clearest lesson. Helping a prohibited service reach Australian users can also carry legal risk. The case also shows that ACMA is prepared to keep older investigations alive until penalties are fixed, especially where consumer access and disguised payment mechanics are involved.