FlightAware Withdraws Kalshi Lawsuit One Day After Filing

FlightAware has dropped its lawsuit against prediction markets platform Kalshi just one day after filing, according to a Tuesday notice filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The move came after a judge ordered Kalshi to show cause as to why a temporary restraining order should not be issued related to FlightAware’s trademarks and alleged use of its data.

In the filing, attorneys for FlightAware stated they voluntarily dismissed the case against Kalshi. As of Wednesday, neither FlightAware nor Kalshi had publicly commented on the matter.

Key takeaways

• FlightAware voluntarily dismissed its lawsuit against Kalshi in the Southern District of New York, one day after the complaint was filed.
• The court had recently required Kalshi to explain why a temporary restraining order should not be granted over FlightAware’s trademarks and data.
• Kalshi event contract listings appeared to update wording from “FlightAware” to “Primary Source Agency,” including added language intended to avoid claims of affiliation.
• The case sits within a broader, ongoing regulatory fight in the U.S. over how prediction markets should be governed.

A rapid reversal in a name-and-data dispute

FlightAware’s lawsuit—filed the day before the dismissal—alleged Kalshi used FlightAware’s “data and name” to run gambling markets tied to flight cancellations. FlightAware’s complaint also accused Kalshi of trademark infringement, breach of contract, harm to its reputation, and unfair competition.

In the subsequent Tuesday filing, FlightAware’s counsel informed the court that the matter was being voluntarily dismissed. A fast turnaround like this often raises questions about whether negotiations were underway or whether the parties resolved issues that made continued litigation unnecessary, but neither side had made any public statement clarifying the reason.

Court order and contract wording changes

Before the dismissal, the case reached a key procedural moment: a judge ordered Kalshi to show cause why the court should not impose a temporary restraining order tied to FlightAware’s trademark and data. That order indicates the dispute had advanced to the point where the court was considering interim relief.

Separately, evidence from Kalshi’s event contracts suggested the platform had altered how it referenced the source of flight data. At least one event contract listing showed a shift in wording from “FlightAware” to “Primary Source Agency,” describing the entity responsible for verifying outcomes related to flight cancellations. The listing also included language stating that the contract did not “indicate an endorsement of this product or any affiliation” between FlightAware and Kalshi.

Cointelegraph reported that it reached out to both companies for comment but did not receive an immediate response.

The contract referenced FlightAware’s website as the “Primary Source Agency,” per Cointelegraph’s reporting and the contract’s displayed language.

Prediction markets remain tangled in U.S. regulatory conflict

FlightAware’s legal dispute is only one example of how prediction market platforms are repeatedly pulled into litigation and regulatory pressure. Cointelegraph notes that Kalshi, Polymarket, and other prediction market companies have faced actions from U.S. state gaming authorities and regulators alleging certain contracts function as illicit sports betting for residents.

At the federal level, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has continued to assert a strong role in how such markets should be regulated. On Tuesday, the CFTC—whose chair Michael Selig has argued the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets—said it invoked “emergency authority” to block New York state officials from seeking a temporary restraining order that would have restricted Kalshi from offering event contracts nationwide.

This CFTC action followed New York authorities filing a lawsuit against Kalshi in July, which alleged Kalshi operated an unlicensed gambling platform through its contracts involving sports and other events.

The CFTC’s position has also been echoed in earlier federal interventions. In Michigan, a judge ordered Kalshi in June to stop offering sports betting contracts to residents until a civil case was resolved. But the CFTC ordered Kalshi not to comply with that state order, placing the platform in what Kalshi’s legal representatives described as an “impossible position” between conflicting state and federal directives.

What to watch next

With FlightAware’s lawsuit now dismissed, the immediate question shifts to what, if anything, changes in Kalshi’s use of flight-related data and branding going forward—and whether other regulatory or legal challenges will continue to move faster than this particular name-and-trademark dispute. Investors and users should also watch for how regulators handle the underlying jurisdictional tension that has repeatedly shaped prediction markets litigation in the U.S.