4 ms·
No, that would not be the appropriate comparison at all. That is the comparison that is more similar to loot boxes, but not to the definition you have decided
by pfisch 8y ago
No, that would not be the appropriate comparison at all.
That is the comparison that is more similar to loot boxes, but not to the definition you have decided upon.
Loot boxes give you variable entertainment, but for that to be gambling you have now defined entertainment value as the element of prize. Gambling requires chance, prize and consideration.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7b39fc2-501e-4e7d-863f-e8e526e31648 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7b39fc2-501e...
At the point where entertainment value is the prize, you have now created a definition of gambling that includes both your example of a random movie, and my example of any movie.
The thing I hate about all of these lootboxes as gambling arguments is that they have no appreciation for what gambling actually is. Instead gambling is now just whatever you feel like is gambling in your gut, not an actual real legal and enforceable definition.
You want to regulate lootboxes, fine, but trying to draw an equivalency to real gambling and lootboxes is just not possible without classifying almost every transaction as gambling.
But honestly, if you want to regulate loot boxes we should probably start by regulating video game addiction because it is a much larger problem that effects a much larger audience.
All of these deeply concerned people who want to regulate loot boxes somehow don't seem to overlap with the group of people who want to regulate video game addiction though. Because the deeper truth is that people want to wield the tools of government like a cudgel to force video game developers to make the kind of games they want.
This whole thing is just a fig leaf similar to how child porn is used to censor the internet and enforce copyright.
- oldcynic 8y ago> Loot boxes give you variable entertainment, but for that to be gambling you have now defined entertainment as the element of prize Variable entertainment? Then a lottery scratch card is "variable entertainment", whatever that is supposed to be. As is I can't distinguish a scratchcard from a lootbox except one has some regulation. They have a feature prize that is the reason for purchase, they have small odds of achieving the feature/promoted prize (Game loot boxes frequently don't give the actual odds), they cost real currency, they can give something of value. Do you then claim that a scratch card is not gambling?
- pfisch 8y agoLet me clear it up for you. The entertainment you derive from a scratch lottery ticket is not the "prize" element of gambling. The prize is the money you win from the scratch off. Gambling devices pay out a prize that is worth a real redeemable cash value and can be sold on an open market. What prize does a loot box give you that is not purely for entertainment value? They do not give you a prize that is redeemable for cash.
- called_it 8y agoHmmm. > the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes
- pfisch 8y agoWhat is that websters? That is not the legal definition of gambling, and all court decisions on the subject clearly indicate that gambling requires real cash value to the prizes and not just entertainment that has no actual value. Loot boxes do not have the 3rd element of gambling, which is the recognized legal definition in virtually every jurisdiction. https://www.truthfinder.com/glossary/gambling-definition/ https://www.truthfinder.com/glossary/gambling-definition/ "In order for the activity to be considered gambling, it must contain three separate elements. These are consideration, chance, and a prize. If one or more of these elements is not present, then gambling is not taking place." "The final element of gambling is the prize. If the player has the chance to win something of value, then gambling is taking place. Again, the amount or value of the prize is inconsequential. As long as it has some value, it is considered gambling."
- mmt 8y ago> Loot boxes do not have the 3rd element of gambling Huh? I thought it was well established that there is value and that, in some cases, it could even be "legitimately" (even according to the rules of the game provider) traded for real-world money. This may not apply to all constructs that could be considered "loot boxes", but I'm confident it's not the case that the vast majority lack the feature of of transferability of the "loot" that would give credence to the argument that any value is purely that of entermainment to the individual user.