Aviation data provider FlightAware has filed a lawsuit against prediction market platform Kalshi, accusing the company of trademark infringement and damaging its reputation by using its data to power flight cancellation betting markets.
The Allegations
The legal complaint centers on claims that Kalshi improperly associated FlightAware's brand with its wagering contracts. According to the filing, the aviation data firm objects to having its name and information tied to a service that state regulators have likened to gambling.
FlightAware argues that this connection risks confusing consumers and tarnishing the credibility it has built as a trusted source for flight tracking information. The company contends that its reputation could suffer if the public assumes it endorses or participates in prediction-market betting.
A trusted data provider says its name should not be dragged into the business of betting on delayed and canceled flights.
The suit reportedly references statements from state authorities who have compared Kalshi's event contracts to gambling products, adding weight to FlightAware's argument that the association is harmful.
Kalshi Under Pressure
The lawsuit adds to the growing list of legal and regulatory challenges facing Kalshi as it expands into an increasingly broad range of prediction markets. The platform has drawn scrutiny from several state gaming regulators who question whether its contracts amount to unlicensed betting.
Kalshi has built markets around real-world events, and flight cancellations represent one of the newer categories drawing attention. Using aviation data to settle those contracts places third-party providers like FlightAware in the middle of the dispute.
Key points in the case include:
- Claims of trademark infringement tied to Kalshi's use of FlightAware's brand
- Allegations of reputational harm to the data provider
- References to state regulators comparing Kalshi's contracts to gambling
The outcome could set an important precedent for how prediction platforms source and cite third-party data, and whether providers can push back when their information underpins contested betting products.