New Zealand declares lootboxes not gambling under the law

    
45
WHERE ARE YOU RIGHT NOW?!

Are lootboxes gambling? It seems like such a simple question, but it really isn’t simple from a legal or ethical standpoint, and the answer has a pretty big impact. According to the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs, following reviews, lootboxes do not meet the legal requirements of gambling, thus freeing them from the scrutiny of agencies designed to look more closely into gambling-related issues.

In short, the argument hinges upon the fact that lootbox items cannot be exchanged for cash and thus do not qualify as gambling under the law. That having been said, it’s not an ironclad ruling which cannot be changed; indeed, it’s something likely to be debated extensively as more and more lawmakers turn a critical eye toward the practice. For the moment, though, New Zealand considers them perfectly acceptable and has picked a side in the ongoing battle.

Source: Gamasutra
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Mikka Hansen

everything can be exchanged for cash. for instance, the rulings of new zealand legislators, as exemplarized here. bet some big fat envelopes traded hands for this decision

Ernost
Reader
Ernost

lootbox items cannot be exchanged for cash

Lol what? I’m guessing their investigation was not very thorough then. Every single MMO I have played has people willing to sell items or even whole accounts on that certain black market site.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
zeko_rena

I live in such a dumb country.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Jack Pipsam

At least it’s pretty.

Reader
Sray

Wow, a thing we couldn’t imagine existing a decade ago doesn’t meet a legal definition created the better part of a century ago. Shocking.

fallwind
Reader
fallwind

hidden prize vending machines are decades old, and things like baseball cards have been around for nearly 100 years now.

Reader
Bryan Correll

Don’t read this as too much of a victory for loot boxes. The DIA is not a legislative body and can only interpret the law as it is written. Gambling commissions in most countries have either taken this position or been silent on the issue. Parliament could still make changes to gambling laws so that loot boxes would be considered gambling.

PS I am not an expert on NZ law, so any Kiwis (or international law experts) out there feel free to correct me.

Reader
Anstalt

I’m surprised that this is news.

We’ve known from the start that there is a difference between gambling and regulated gambling. The definitions and laws are pretty clear country to country – paid-for-lootboxes are gambling, but not regulated gambling due to the reward not being cash.

So why are we still focusing on determining whether lockboxes are already regulated? We already know they aren’t!

The debate is supposed to be about should we regulate lootboxes and how we regulate, not about whether we already do.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

The debate is supposed to be about should we regulate lootboxes and how we regulate, not about whether we already do.

Totally agree.

Something else that should be thrown into that discussion is whether or not all gamers/countries should be pressured into adopting some kind of regulation just because a few others might have a problem with something.

It reminds me of how the U.S. has a problem with marijuana or sex, regulates it heavily (illegal) and then tries to pressure other countries that choose to let it’s citizens determine the course of responsibility for themselves.

Reader
Zora

It reminds me of how the U.S. has a problem with marijuana or sex, regulates it heavily (illegal) and then tries to pressure other countries that choose to let it’s citizens determine the course of responsibility for themselves.

Gambling already is regulated differently in different countries, so even if the entire planet agreed lootboxes are gambling companies would still be able to get away with it in different ways in each country.

I understand about minors, but how would you even protect adults prone to addictions where such a condition is not recognized or regulated?

In my country for example, people who declare themselves gambling addicts are allowed to not pay their debts… unless it’s the state you owe the money to… which is interesting an interpretation of a clinical condition, I’d say :P

Reader
Sally Bowls

It reminds me of how the U.S. has a problem with marijuana or sex, regulates it heavily (illegal) and then tries to pressure other countries that choose to let it’s citizens determine the course of responsibility for themselves.

I live in a state where prostitution, pot and gambling are legal and a state income tax and annual legislature is not. E.g., gambling is not a really legislated much by the US. 50 states have 50 different sets of laws regarding gambling.

Reader
Zora

So why are we still focusing on determining whether lockboxes are already regulated? We already know they aren’t!

Because if legislators can liquidate an issue by incorporating it into an existing legal framework rather than having to examine it and regulate it by scratch, it means they can look good without having to actually work hard for their humble salaries :P

Reader
rafael12104

A few thoughts before my morning coffee, (I get a little testy before my first cup.)

First, hardly an original response. The English commission said almost the same thing, and so have others who argue it is not gambling. Makes me wonder if cut and paste is the way laws made.

Second, the real fight isn’t with the “commission” it is with the laws which give commissions their mandate and power. Have to change the laws kiddies. That was always going to be the way of it.

Third it doesn’t matter that “legally” it is not defined as gambling. Lootboxes have the same habit forming and nefarious effect. And it may even be more insidious in that it caters directly to children and young adults. So, while it may matter to that commission, it should not matter to us how it is defined.

We keep pushing, and bitching until either the industry finds an acceptable way to regulate these gambling boxes or politicians see the low hanging fruit and propose new legislation to cut out the cancer.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

Third it doesn’t matter that “legally” it is not defined as gambling. Lootboxes have the same habit forming and nefarious effect.

I don’t know about this argument. Everything potentially has the same “habit forming and nerarious effect” to some people.

I know plenty of coffee drinkers who are addicted, yet there are no warning labels on coffee for that as a law because most people can drink a cup and put the cup down afterwards.

Not sure we should make laws because a few people spend too much money on boxes (although I don’t want boxes in my game at all), when most players can simply ignore them or enjoy them in moderation without a “warning”.

Reader
Sray

Habit forming items/activities aren’t regulated based on whether or not they might be addictive, but on the possible harmful results of addiction. It’s highly unlikely that a person will steal thousands of dollars or physically hurt a stranger on the street to cover a caffeine addiction; but a drug or gambling habit is an entirely different story.

Reader
rafael12104

Caffeine, yeah it has it bad points, but rarely will it drain your entire bank account on the promise of another win.

Personal responsibility. That is my thing, but people need a chance to exercise that right and a chance to teach and protect their kids from predatory loot boxes.

Hey, the industry and self regulate and contain this. But, I doubt that they will

cryinglightning39
Reader
cryinglightning39

But they can be sold as cash. You can turn around and sell them for real money on sites like player auctions.com. These politicians aren’t doing their due diligence because they don’t care about things like this.

Reader
Bryan Correll

Using those sites is almost always against a game’s terms of service.

Reader
race sweet

And gashapon parlors that hand out tiny novelty gold bars as prizes that can be conveniently sold at the store next door get closed down even if they aren’t directly handing out the cash prize. Setting up a random system where players can sell good drops for cash conspicuously on this other website sounds like the same form of incentive’s to me.

Reader
Bryan Correll

I’m not familiar with that practice, but gold is fungible and the parlor giving it out can not even theoretically control what happens to it once it leaves the parlor. With virtual items the game company can, and should when aware of it, take action such as banning accounts.
I’m not defending the use of auction sites, in fact quite the opposite. But virtual items are not the same as physical items legally.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
Schlag Sweetleaf

.

a ruse by any other name....jpg
Reader
A Dad Supreme

Aw, I was expecting a “One Lootbox to Rule Them All” motif. :(

Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
Schlag Sweetleaf

Sorry about your luck, Dad. I have it on good authority the meme you seek is contained in one of the boxes below. Choose well;)

MEME BOX MAGIC.gif
Reader
Utakata

Snake eyes! I always thought that was an insult to snakes though. :(

Reader
Knox Harrington

The fact that lootbox items cannot be exchanged for cash makes it an even more lame and pathetic form of gambling. Whether you want to call it gambling or not, it still triggers the exact same addictive chemical reactions in the brain as any other sort of addiction. If you want to argue semantics, fine but know that your argument is shallow because what’s going on neurologically is far deeper and cause for concern. In short, the kiwis should stick to what they’re good at: rugby and portraying little people in Peter Jackson movies.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

In short, the kiwis should stick to what they’re good at: rugby and portraying little people in Peter Jackson movies.

I think this is an unnecessary insult at New Zealanders. This has nothing to do with the people as the politicians aren’t actors or rugby players.

The fact is that this is the New Zealand governmental system which is in-charge of governing in the interests of it’s New Zealanders, not citizens of the U.K., U.S.A, Canada, or anywhere else. So you (and a few others) are upset that they didn’t join the bandwagon to call all boxes gambling, so now they suck and are in-bed because of monetary interests.

Whatever happened to a country’s right to determine it’s own course without being “lootbox shamed” into going along (and against) what it feels is a common-sense decision regarding personal choice?

I think it’s wrong to come down on a country that decides to rule it’s own way for it’s own citizen’s interests and not succumb to mob rule when your own country (whichever you live in) is just sitting around, “reviewing information” and taking things under advisement indefinitely.

Reader
Knox Harrington

I was only making a joke. Try not to get so triggered lol

Reader
Bryan Correll

Don’t tell me not to get triggered by your micro-aggressions!

Reader
Loyal Patron
Cosmic Cleric

Think Knox was commenting more on the brain effects, regardless of currency, than New Zealand’s right to govern.

Think the last sentence was a failed attempt at humor.

Reader
A Dad Supreme

Yeah, definitely a failed attempt.

The brain effects though, I still don’t believe it’s right to make laws because a few people are affected (proportionally) when most everyone else don’t have a problem with brain effects.

As said, there are plenty of things that only affect a few that are addictive (coffee, fast foods, home shopping networks, etc) that don’t need regulations because the majority of the population don’t need them. They have either common sense or no problems with impulse control.

I think a more balanced, effective and direct response/approach would be to offer online counseling to those players who continually get a buzz from overspending and going bankrupt on something like a video game.