● Live Wisconsin AG suit vs Kalshi & Polymarket pending · NY/IL insider-trading orders in effect · Updated May 2026
← News & Updates
Platform news

Kalshi Partners With Signify to Police Athlete Harassment, Codifies Anti-Abuse Rule

Kalshi announced a partnership with Signify Group on October 15 to monitor social media for abuse and threats directed at athletes, coaches, and sports personnel across the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and ATP Tour. Kalshi notified the CFTC of a new rule, dated October 13, codifying athlete harassment as an 'impermissible activity', with sanctions up to financial penalties and permanent account closure. The move follows a September appeal by five major leagues and their players' unions for lifetime bans on abusive bettors.

Kalshi announced a partnership with Signify Group on October 15, 2026 to address online abuse of athletes connected to its sports event contracts. Signify's Threat Matrix system will monitor public social media for abuse, threats, and harassment targeting athletes, coaches, and sports personnel across the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and ATP Tour. Kalshi users identified as responsible for abusive behaviour may face enforcement up to permanent account closure, with evidence referred to sports organisations or law enforcement. Kalshi separately notified the CFTC of a new rulebook provision, dated October 13, codifying athlete harassment as an 'impermissible activity', with sanctions that could include financial penalties. The effort runs through the Bad Actor Program established by Signify and Integrity Compliance 360 (IC360).

For UK readers, Signify is a familiar name: the UK-based firm already provides online-abuse monitoring for English football, tennis, and other sports, and its Threat Matrix is used to identify and report abusers to clubs and police. Its expansion into prediction market operator compliance mirrors the model UK sports have used for several years. The initiative addresses a specific, well-documented problem: when individuals have money riding on an athlete's performance, the incentive to abuse that athlete over a poor result intensifies. A September appeal by five major US leagues and their players' unions for lifetime bans on abusive bettors made this a front-line issue. Fanatics Sportsbook announced a similar Signify partnership in June; BetMGM introduced comparable protections in February. Kalshi's move brings the prediction market sector into line with the responsible-operator practices the licensed betting industry has begun to adopt.

The timing serves a strategic purpose beyond the substantive benefit. Kalshi is defending its sports contracts against state enforcement and NFL opposition on the ground that it operates as a responsible, federally-regulated exchange rather than an unregulated gambling operation. Voluntarily adopting athlete-protection measures that match or exceed what licensed sportsbooks do demonstrates that Kalshi takes integrity responsibilities seriously, even as it argues legally that its products are not sports wagering. Codifying the measure in its CFTC rulebook — rather than as an internal policy — frames athlete protection as part of its regulated-exchange compliance, reinforcing the argument that the CFTC structure can address the integrity concerns states cite as reasons for gambling regulation.

The limits are also worth noting. One analyst observed that protecting athletes from abuse does not stop the abuse — monitoring and sanctioning users after the fact addresses the symptom, not the underlying dynamic that financial stakes on individual athletes create. The deeper concern the NFL and others raise is not only harassment but manipulation: contracts tied to individual player performance, injuries, and officiating create incentives to trade on non-public information and, in extreme cases, to attempt to influence outcomes. The Signify partnership addresses harassment but not manipulation, which remains the more serious integrity risk. Still, the measures are concrete and verifiable, and they position Kalshi favourably against the criticism that prediction market platforms are indifferent to the real-world consequences of the markets they create. As the sector institutionalises and seeks mainstream acceptance, such responsible-operator measures are likely to become standard — both for their genuine protective value and for their role in the platforms' argument that they can self-regulate within the CFTC framework.

Operators mentioned in this article


Recent updates


Google Adds Prediction Market Ad Policy — CFTC License Required, Ads Blocked in Five States

Google published a dedicated prediction markets section in its advertising policy on October 15, requiring domestic operators to hold a CFTC Designated Contract Market licence to run ads — favouring Kalshi and Polymarket US over unlicensed rivals. Google also bars prediction market ads targeting five states where enforcement is most active: Connecticut, Michigan, New York, Ohio, and Nevada. The policy makes Google's ad platform mirror the state enforcement map, using commercial access as a de facto regulatory layer.

CFTC Moves to Classify Event Contracts as Swaps — Attempting to Settle the Core SCOTUS Question by Rule

The CFTC, led by Chairman Michael Selig, moved on October 9 to explicitly classify event contracts as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act, placing prediction market contracts under federal swap regulation. The scope covers sports, political, cultural, and weather contracts, while a separate provision excludes casino-style gambling and sportsbook wagers. Selig said the aim is to remove 'any ambiguity.' The action targets the exact question dividing the federal circuits and now before the Supreme Court — whether event contracts are 'swaps.'

Seminole Tribe Sues DraftKings as 145 Tribal Governments Urge SCOTUS to Act — But Tribes Are Split

The Seminole Tribe of Florida sued DraftKings on October 8 in Broward County court, alleging DraftKings' Pick6 and sports event contracts operate as unlicensed sportsbooks that violate the Tribe's exclusive sports betting rights under its 2021 Florida gaming compact. The same week, roughly 130 federally recognised tribes and 15 tribal organisations filed a Supreme Court amicus brief urging the Court to hear the Kalshi case, citing IGRA and unauthorised gaming on Indian lands. But the tribal community is split: several California tribes and an Oklahoma tribe have instead partnered with Kalshi.