Dutch regulator orders Endorphina to restrict slots on unlicensed casino sites

The Dutch gambling regulator, Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), published a binding instruction against slot supplier Endorphina on 2 November 2026. The decision was signed on 19 October and addresses Endorphina Limited in Malta and Endorphina Ltd. in Cyprus. KSA concluded that the companies had not taken adequate steps to prevent their games from being offered to people in the Netherlands through online casinos without Dutch licences. The instruction concerns distribution of games through unlicensed operators, not a blanket prohibition on Endorphina titles at licensed Dutch casinos.

The order required adequate preventive measures and a report to KSA within two weeks of its 19 October date. That period reached 2 November, the day the regulator made the decision public. The published notice does not say whether Endorphina has since complied, so the passage of the deadline alone does not establish either compliance or a fresh breach.

KSA's written decision records Endorphina games on 13 unlicensed sites in January and February, 19 sites during June checks, and eight sites inspected on 29 and 30 September. These are three investigation snapshots, not 40 different casinos: some domains appear in more than one round. Investigators said they could access and play named titles from Dutch IP addresses without effective technical restrictions.

The September list included Winningz, Wizebets, LuckyGem, Playboom24, Monixbet, Qbet, Igo.bet and Betplay.io. The decision identifies Endorphina games such as Hell Hot 100, Geisha and 3 Golden Chests during these checks. The regulator had previously taken action against operators of Qbet and LuckyGem, yet its later inspection still found Endorphina titles there.

Endorphina disputed the regulator's assessment. According to the decision, it said its Maltese and Cypriot businesses are separate, that it supplies games to licensed operators through business-to-business channels, and that third-party distributors may determine where games ultimately appear. It also said it had restricted access on sites flagged by KSA in July and tightened arrangements with partners. The company did not admit wrongdoing.

KSA considered those measures insufficient because games remained accessible during the September inspections. Its legal position is that a game supplier can facilitate unlicensed gambling even without intending to do so. The instruction allows preventive technical controls and contractual restrictions with customers or distributors. It does not establish that every Endorphina distributor or every operator carrying the supplier's games is unlicensed.

This is a binding administrative instruction rather than a monetary fine. Endorphina may object within six weeks of the decision's notification, but the decision states that filing an objection does not suspend the instruction. A court can be asked for interim relief. As of the 2 November publication, KSA's notice records the order and the right to object, not a subsequent compliance outcome or a financial penalty.

For Dutch players, the practical distinction is the operator's licence. A game supplier's branding, game certification or availability in another jurisdiction is not proof that the casino website offering the game holds a Dutch licence. KSA maintains a public register of authorised operators. The order targets access through unlicensed websites and does not itself require players to stop using a properly licensed Dutch operator.