A panel that looked into the ethical considerations of implementing AI solutions within the gaming sector took place today at SiGMA Euro-Med – a conference being held at the Mediterranean Maritime Hub in Malta. Moderated by Chris Galloway, Head of iGaming Product at Sumsub, guest speakers included Jaguar Gal, CEO of Jaguar Reg&Comp, Sharon Xuereb, Senior Associate at Camilleri Preziosi, and Kush Desai, Founder and CEO of Source Code Lab. Follow the agenda online for more panels taking place today.
Offering a legal perspective, Sharon Xuereb believes AI sits middle of the road: neither saviour nor dystopian by default. She acknowledged the potential to reduce harm and improve tech within current legal guardrails, such as the EU AI Act, Data Act, and GDPR but cautioned that the dystopian risks are real – especially with generative AI, and it is unclear if current EU laws will be sufficient to fully manage these risks.
“It’s premature to say whether AI is either a saviour or a dystopian threat. We haven’t yet seen the full extent of what AI can do, especially with technologies like generative AI rolling out quickly. We’re at a crucial juncture.”
Kush Desai chimes in – “AI isn’t brand new – it’s been around since the 1950s. What’s new is the rise of generative AI, which only became widely available in 2021. At its core, AI is a statistical, language-based technology. And like other digital tools before it – analytics, BI, personalization – it’s designed to serve a capitalistic goal: encourage customers to spend more.”
Desai however is clear in his view – the issue isn’t whether AI manipulates – it does and will – that is after all its business role. The real crux of the question, he says, is finding where to draw the limits. He also warns that Europe risks over-regulating, “Used responsibly, AI is just another step forward, like the internet or crypto. But strict regulation, especially in Europe, risks pushing companies elsewhere, like the US, which is taking a much more pro-innovation stance.
Jaguar Gal however leans towards optimism. “AI is the natural next step for iGaming if we want to evolve the industry. Of course there are unknowns – we don’t know exactly how it will develop – but I believe it’s a positive change overall. Not a savior, but definitely a powerful tool that can move the industry forward.”
AI personalization: Tailored or trap?
Hopping onto a different track, moderator Chris Galloway asks: Personalization makes gambling feel smarter, but at what point does tailored start to feel like trapped?
Desai counters that users already expect a high level of personalisation these days and, when it comes to gaming – can improve engagement and retention – take Netflix for example; it shows us what we like and enjoy. The danger comes when we cross over into the realms of manipulation, which breeds compulsive loops and, finally, addiction. Regulators will need to draw very fine lines, he concludes.
Gal is in agreement: “Regulators will need to step in and define boundaries, while still allowing businesses to innovate. The laws are constantly evolving across regions, so it’s about balancing stickiness with responsibility.” Entertainment industries inherently aim to “trap” attention. Players will feel stuck at some point – it’s by design.
So, what can be done at a legislative level to refine regulations for iGaming specifically?
As Sharon says, personalization can feel empowering for consumers, but is already legally defined as profiling under GDPR.
“Article 22 outlines what can and can’t be automated without human oversight or consent. The EU AI Act builds on this, adding requirements for transparency and human-in-the-loop processes for high-risk systems.” Focus on adapting existing rules, not panicking, there’s no need to reinvent the wheel, she advises.
Responsible gambling: Can AI balance profit with protection when it comes to gaming?
Desai believes that, for now, it’s mostly just a sales pitch. Regulation lags behind tech; the EU AI Act, he says, is intentionally broad. “Regulations always follow innovation, and AI is still new.”
“The real test will be whether operators, regulators, and platform providers can work together to ensure personalization doesn’t become manipulation.”
The current AI Act already risks being outdated, opines Gal. As currently written, she doesnt believe the act can keep pace with technology.
Tech evolves faster than regulation – companies that strictly comply risk being left behind. “What we’ll likely see is a patchwork of interpretations, procedures, and guidelines that update more quickly than legislation itself.
Sharon is in agreement. The real test, she believes will be enforcement – whether, “regulators have the expertise and teeth to act effectively.” It’s one thing to write laws on paper; it’s another to enforce them across industries like iGaming, where data, AI, and regulation intersect, she concludes.
