SoylentNews

Are Loot Boxes in Games a Violation of Gambling Laws?

posted by cmn32480 on Monday January 08 2018, @03:34PM   
from the 1-in-365,214,231-chance-of-getting-the-good-stuff dept.

Bill Dimm writes:

Loot boxes in video games give the player a random item, perhaps a weapon or a skin, typically in exchange for payment. Should they be viewed as a legal sweepstakes or as an illegal lottery? This video examines the legal issues and explains how loot boxes could be structured to avoid running afoul of gambling laws (which vary by state) in the U.S.. The video concludes that many current implementations of loot boxes are really illegal lotteries, and conjectures that major game companies use them anyway because the risk of being prosecuted isn't enough to dissuade them.

Previously: Belgium Moving to Ban "Loot Boxes" Throughout Europe, Hawaii Could Restrict Sale to Minors

---

Original Submission

• Re:Protect dependents from their caregivers (Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Monday January 08 2018, @08:07PM

  by khallow (3766) on Monday January 08 2018, @08:07PM (#619663) Journal

  So let me rephrase what nanny-staters appear to really want: What should a civilized society do to protect dependents from the harmful effects of the self-destruction of their caregivers?

  The problem is not in the question, it's in the definition of who is a dependent. Some go as far as to make everyone wards of the state. That has the obvious implication that none of the "dependents" should have a say, the State knows best - a classic authoritarian maneuver. The problem that your question evokes is what happens when the "civilized state" is the self-destructive caregiver? Who will rescue the dependents in that case?

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+1
  Interesting=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Interesting' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		2