[T4VERTS]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

IANAL but my current understanding is that if you're receiving any sort of digital good in exchange for money, the action fails the "chance" pillar of the three-prong test that United States courts use to determine if a particular action is gambling. Put another way: since you're always receiving something in return for your money in that case, you are never risking anything, so it's not gambling. There is no chance you simply lose your money, you're spending it towards a vaguely-described good. Basically this. There's often no explicit "lose" state in these loot boxes, you just don't get the chase item you want, you get something else instead. Opening a MUT pack doesn't have a "lose" state, for example; all your cards you receive are presented as if they are the latest and greatest.

Consideration, Chance, Prize are the three things you look for when applying the litmus test here. MUT along with trading cards in general do actually meet all three prongs to this test. The reality is they have been allowed to exist because it was never viewed as a big enough problem to care. This is something that may evolve with the digital age though.

Consideration means that there was a payment or exchange of goods to receive something back. Even if you are guaranteed to get at least something of equal or greater back it still meets the consideration standard. This idea that if you always get something back it's not gambling is false, contrary to popular belief.

Does skill matter in any way to dictate the outcome of the result? If not then it is considered chance, actually if it's not considered at least 51% skill it is considered chance.

Do you receive a prize for participation, or possibly receive a prize? This is an obvious yes in many cases but is still one of the requirements to establish gambling.


To see how this gets applied in the real world look to sweepstakes and other random drawing type promotions. When you see giveaways advertised you'll often times hear the term "no purchase necessary to enter". The reason this is stated expressly is because it removes one of the prongs to gambling thus making these giveaways not gambling due to the lack of consideration. Often times, if there were not a free opportunity to enter many of these sweepstakes (think McDonald's Monopoly) would actually be considered gambling.