VPNs and Online Betting: What the Terms Say

A VPN hides where a connection comes from. A licensed sportsbook is licensed for particular places, and writes its terms accordingly. This page is about what two of those documents actually say, because the consequences they set out fall on money that has already been staked.

What the Operators' Own Terms Say

bet365's terms and conditions list what the company defines as a "Prohibited Activity". One item is unambiguous:

"if you are using or attempting to use a VPN or similar technology to disguise your location"

Note "or attempting to". The breach is the attempt, not a successful deception — and section 16.2's own preamble says so, defining a Prohibited Activity to include "any attempt to engage in" the listed activities. The clause sits in section 16.2 of bet365's terms — but which document that URL serves depends on where the reader is, and the lettering differs between them. In the Gibraltar version it is item (k); in the two United States versions, which open the list without Gibraltar's bankruptcy limb, it is item (j) and item (k) is the chargeback clause. Section 16.2 is the stable reference; the letter is not, so it is worth reading the document the site actually serves you.

FanDuel Sportsbook's terms reach the same place without naming the technology. This is the sportsbook document for New Jersey — the operator states that it runs "under an agreement with New Meadowlands Racetrack, LLC" and "pursuant to the oversight, regulatory requirements, and licensing" of the state's Division of Gaming Enforcement and Racing Commission. Among the representations a customer makes on opening an account, in its section 5:

"You will not disguise or interfere in any way with the internet protocol (“IP address”) of the computer or other Device (defined below) you are using to access the Services or otherwise take steps to prevent us from correctly identifying the actual IP address of the Device you are using while accessing the Services"

That is broader than a VPN ban in one respect and narrower in another. It names no technology — but it is about the IP address specifically. Location itself is handled by separate provisions in the same document, including a mandatory opt-in: "You will not be able to access the games or sports wagering menus … unless you have opted into location verification."

What Happens to the Money

bet365 states the consequences in section 16.1, immediately before that list. Engaging in a Prohibited Activity

"will (depending on the specific circumstances) include the voiding of any relevant Transactions, the withholding of any attributable winnings, and the suspension and/or closure of your Account."

Three things, in that order: transactions voided, winnings withheld, account closed. The same clause adds that a customer "may also be liable to compensate us for losses suffered by us as a result of you engaging in a Prohibited Activity".

FanDuel Sportsbook's terms reserve equivalent powers for a breach of its terms generally: "Without restricting our ability to rely on other remedies … we may suspend or terminate your Account and/or cancel any Bets placed by you at our absolute discretion if … We suspect that you … Are breaching any term of these Terms, including the House Rules."

Both documents do carry some constraints on how those powers are used — but they are narrower than they first look, and on this subject the narrowing matters.

bet365's clause is often read as limiting the consequence to winnings. It does not. The New Jersey and Illinois documents provide, at clause 17.5(b), that the company "will withhold all or part of the Account balance and/or void or recover from your Account deposits, pay-outs, Promos, and/or any winnings (if/as applicable) in each case to the extent attributable to the relevant Prohibited Activity(ies)" — balance and deposits as well as winnings. The Gibraltar document says the same thing at 17.6(b), with "Offers" where the American ones say "Promos": the defined terms differ between versions, which is the second reason to read the one actually served to you. The sub-paragraph immediately above it is harsher still, and the distinction between them is worth holding onto: "if you have engaged in illegal activity, we are under no obligation to refund to you any money that may be in your Account", with no attribution limit at all. That limb turns on illegal activity rather than on a Prohibited Activity, so using a VPN engages the limb with the limit — unless betting from where the reader actually is happens also to be unlawful there, which is the question the rest of this page is about.

FanDuel's terms do close with an undertaking "that we exercise such rights in a manner which is fair to you and to our customers generally" — but it is self-limiting by its own words, which begin "In exercising any of our rights under this Section 9", and Section 9 is headed "Suspicious Betting". The suspend, terminate and cancel-bets power quoted above is in Section 8, exercisable "at our absolute discretion", with no fairness qualifier attached to it.

There is a regulator route, and it comes with the condition that decides whether it is available at all: "If, after all reasonable methods to resolve the dispute with us have been exhausted, your dispute is still unresolved and it arises out of your use of the Services while physically located in New Jersey, you can contact the NJDGE by completing an Internet Dispute Form on the NJDGE's website." A dispute arising from a bet placed from somewhere else is, on the face of that clause, outside it.

Why the Site Has to Know Where You Are

A licence is a document with a territory attached. FanDuel Sportsbook's terms say so plainly, and put the legal risk on the customer:

"The availability of our Services does not constitute an offer, solicitation or invitation by us for the use of our Services outside of the State of New Jersey. BIU shall not be liable for any breach of any local, national, federal, state or other laws that may occur as a result of your using the Services."

The two sentences before it are blunter still, and are the ones worth carrying away: the document states that it is "a federal offense for persons physically located outside of New Jersey to engage in Internet wagering through a New Jersey casino or New Jersey racetrack, unless explicitly authorized by the NJDGE". The carve-out at the end is part of the sentence and belongs in it — the offence is not unqualified.

Read that alongside the IP clause and the arrangement is clear enough. The operator is required to know where its customers are, it writes a term forbidding interference with that, and it declines in advance to carry the consequences of a customer who breaks a local law by getting around it.

What a Block Is Actually Telling You

Many countries make unlicensed betting sites unreachable, and France's regulator publishes what it considers the risks of using one. Its blacklist page names them as "notamment non-paiement des gains, escroquerie, vol de données personnelles, fraudes aux moyens de paiement, absence de protection légale en cas de litige, etc" — notably non-payment of winnings, fraud, theft of personal data, payment fraud, and the absence of legal protection in a dispute.

The list is expressly non-exhaustive — "notamment", and "etc" — so it is not a complete account of the risks. But one of the five is that there is no legal protection in a dispute, and that is the item a VPN does nothing about. It changes which site will accept a bet. It does not create anyone to complain to afterwards.

The Questions Worth Asking Instead

If a site refuses a connection, the useful question is what the legal position is where the reader lives, because that determines whether there is a licensed route at all. The country guides answer it market by market: the legal status of betting there, and the regulator where one exists. Where this site has been able to confirm an operator on that regulator's own register, the guide lists it; on most pages it cannot, and says so rather than implying a local licence. How countries block gambling websites covers who orders the blocking and how, and regulated versus unregulated markets covers what a licence obliges an operator to do with a customer's money.

Where no licensed route exists, that is the finding, and it is a more useful one than a workaround whose stated price is the winnings.