Will the Raffle count as Gambling?

Now that the Gambling investigations in Online Games kick in we should ask if this will or can also effect the SotA Raffle/Lottery. The gambling regulations will only kick in when real Money can be invested into increase the chance to win element. Since Portalarium allows RMT, this gives the in game Gold and also the deeds that you can win, a real money value.

Also Elmo is the best prove that you can always win when you just buy enough tickets. Will the Gambling Commission denounces this as gambling?
Will Portalarium do anything against it?

 

Link?

 

Any form of gambling within an American based online game that sanctions RMT can potentially lead to legal problems, but it's not usually possible to say exactly what would and what wouldn't be a problem. Federal online gambling laws aren't black and white and each state also has it's own rules.

I don't know of any precedent that would apply perfectly to a raffle in SotA, but one thing working in it's favor is that there is precedent for considering how big a part of a game that gambling actually is. In the case of SotA, the raffle is only one tiny facet of a very large game that has nothing to do with gambling. There is always discretion involved in enforcement though, and for good reason. If rules and enforcement were black and white, then it would become easy for people to circumvent the rules by doing things like running a blackjack site that also has a bunch of non gambling content tacked on to make it mostly not blackjack.

I think it's extremely unlikely that SotA would ever get in any trouble over their housing raffle, even if someone sued them or made a complaint, but their RMT status definitely does mean that they should be more careful than they otherwise would be when it comes to that sort of thing.

 

https://www.google.de/amp/s/arstech...ing-hawaiian-legislator-calls-them-predatory/


This does not count for lootboxes only. If the investigations are done and the commission made a decision, the chances are high the this can effect SotA. Especially because someone from reddit already wrote a letter to the UK Gambling Commision to check this case.

 

Blackjack in another category the a raffle because you can influence the game a bit. But for Europe they have to pay a fee or age restrict the game to avoid problems or the game will not be sold.

Edit:
There it doesnt matter how big the part of the game is or how many money you spent. In Germany a 50 cent raffle already counts for example

 

Es werden Lootboxen untersucht. Es besteht effektiv kein Zusammenhang zwischen deinem Post und dem Link.

 

Peter Naessens hat in einem interview von VTM News klar gemacht das dies sehr wahrscheinlich als präzedenzfall für publisher gelten wird, die ähnliche System im Spiel nutzen. Das mit lootboxen war nur der Anfang. Jetzt kommt der Frust der Spieler und immer mehr Spiele werden untersucht.

 

Das ist ja auch alles gut und richtig. Lootboxen sind ja wohl die absolut frechste Erfindung der Spielindustrie.
ABER. Die IG Lotterie hier basiert auf IG Gold. Rechtlich ist es tatsächlich erstmal irrelevant ob man das auf dem Zweitmarkt mit echtem Geld kaufen kann.
Ich will nicht ausschließen, dass sich das irgendwann mal ändert. Dazu müsste es aber erstmal irgendwer durch Klagen.

 

If the in game raffle was purchased directly with cotos there may be a case. However purchases by in game gold would not however fall under the rmt loot boxes that were ruled on in Beligum since you can get them without any real currency involved.

 

So both the PEGI and the ESRB which are the ones that matter don't even consider lootboxes where keys are purchased with real money as Gambling or even simulated gambling nor worthy of a higher rating or further special investigation.

Where the bruha in Belgium is about large volume actors like EA.

So I'd state that in the SotA raffle where it is not promoted to a fault, where you earn in game currency which is used to buy raffle tickets and where it is better to purchase the potential prize outright than to try to win it, in a low scale indie game with a smallish player base.

Then the chance of special investigation is slim and the chance of repercussion is zero.

Storm in a glass, nothing more at this point.

Also even IF the PEGI or ESRB would look into things it wouldn't take more than a day to remake the raffle into something to fit any new rules they make up.
This since the raffle is zero profit for Portslarium and instead a way to distribute game assets to players.

Same thing with the royal Gambling Commission of UK.

So a complete non issue.

 

Ich werd jetzt keine Namen nennen oder es verlinken aber hier mal die Antwort der UK Glücksspiel Behörd:

Dear Mr XXXX

Thank you for contacting the gambling Commission regarding Shroud of Avatar developed by Portalarium.

Please note that Portalarium do not currently hold a licence with us and therefore we are unable to discuss the legalities of the business.

We have passed this information onto our intelligence team for further consideration. As we are sure you understand we are unable to give individual feedback on any internal investigations.

 

LOL. Dann viel Glück an whoever.
Ich glaube kaum, dass da viel bei rum kommt um ehrlich zu sein ^^
Und wenn ich das richtig sehe haben die Engländer eh kein besonders rigiden Glücksspielgesetze.
Aber schauen wir mal was dabei rum kommt.

 

While it's true that there are rules any many places that apply specifically to raffles, online raffles still fall under the umbrella of online gambling in the US and are subject ot many of the same regulations as anything else. If a charity has an annual online raffle fund raiser, it's very unlikely to be a problem, although there are still some rules. If I open up rafflemania.com and give away merchandise via cash ticket drawings every 5 minutes, I would be shut down very quickly.

This isn't necessarily true. There are a lot of cases where people get in trouble for gambling with things that would normally be worthless, because it's clear that the worthless currency is being used to circumvent the rules and is actually not worthless at all. It is extremely relevant if prizes can be easily converted back into money, even if it is a multi step process. This is also why RMT policy is very important, because the game is less likely to get in trouble if they don't sanction the conversion of items to money.

 

Can you provide examples and case law on the subject?

 

You can also get the Battlefront lootboxes without any real money, still it is under investigation.

 

Von mir aus können se es ja auch ignorieren müssen se selber wissen. Das wird sich nicht nur auf UK oder Belgien beschränken. Das ist ein Lauffeuer und wenn es Porta erwischt bevor se was dagegen tun dann prost mahlzeit. Ob es wahrscheinlich ist oder nicht, es wäre dumm es zu ignorieren.

 

Ich weiß nicht. Meiner Meinung nach erfüllt es einfach nicht die Bedingungen von Glücksspiel.
Aber das sollen Leute entscheiden die berufener sind als ich ^^
Stimmt allerdings schon, besser Vorsicht als Nachsicht.

 

Gambling Commission UK
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/about/Who-we-are-and-what-we-do/Who-we-are-and-what-we-do.aspx
Wrong jurisdiction and not applicable.

Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006
https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2010/fil10035a.pdf
Right jurisdiction and not applicable.

The other ones mentioned like PEGI or ESRB are just rating systems which are private entities and not laws but whose ratings are crucial to sales.
As private entities they have their own set of subjective rulings etc and as such it is more about precedent than anything. So those could be applicable IF those organizations would consider them to be. However they have already made rulings on similar things and ruled them not to be Gambling nor Simulated Gambling.

Hence - a complete non issue for Shroud of the Avatar.

 

You have actually not listed any of the rulings from this court if you look it up they are pretty specific. The combination of random loot boxes and pay to play specifically real currency is gambling. There is currently no direct way to buy a raffle ticket with real money so Portalarium will not be liable to change it. Now players may be doing real money gambling through external transactions but that would make them liable not Portalarium. However if you can find some case laws where this conflicts I would love to read them. I haven't been able to locate any rulings even close to what Portalarium is doing. The ruling out of Belgium seems to only be involved with companies that directly take real money from players for these loot boxes.

 

Yes Spoon,

That's the US law I read as well and support the position that this is a non issue. I was talking to Tetsu asking for any case law to the contrary which I have not seen any so far.