Jump to content
Prokofy Neva

Loot Boxes Revisited

Recommended Posts

Laws are interpretive, it may well have been written in such a way that decides "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is considered a duck".
Therefore lawmakers don't specifically attempt to enumerate all variations on a theme because someone would just tweak one aspect, call it something different and skirt the law.

It would be up to the courts to decide if gacha can be considered a lootbox under the law but that would only happen when tested in a specific case.

Of course companies like LL also get an interpretation and advice from their lawyers about these things, especially on the risk of being legally exposed.
We don't know when or if they have sought advice about gacha or at what stage that process is at currently.
It is also possible that LL have decided that the risks of it leaving them exposed to legal risk is low and have decided to allow them.
The risk is theirs to take.  We cannot know for sure unless LL give a public statement about it.

Edited by Gabriele Graves
remove left-over word from sentence restructure
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Can you back that statement up with legal documentation?

No, because it didnt happen. One can not prove a negative. But seeing as they didnt include SL in their law about lootboxes/gachas one can conclude they didnt see it as an issue. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Laws are interpretive, it may well have been written in such a way that decides "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is considered a duck".
Therefore lawmakers of don't specifically attempt to enumerate all variations on a theme because someone would just tweak one aspect, call it something different and skirt the law.

It would be up to the courts to decide if gacha can be considered a lootbox under the law but that would only happen when tested in a specific case.

Of course companies like LL also get an interpretation and advice from their lawyers about these things, especially on the risk of being legally exposed.
We don't know when or if they have sought advice about gacha or at what stage that process is at currently.
It is also possible that LL have decided that the risks of it leaving them exposed to legal risk is low and have decided to allow them.
The risk is theirs to take.  We cannot know for sure unless LL give a public statement about it.

Like i said many times, this whole debate is a moot point as our opinions here have zero bearing on what the lawmakers decide.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Desudesudesuka said:

Not the same? It's literally a case of a tidal wave vs a tsunami. Gacha is essentially a lootbox with 1 item. Gacha itself is a thing, and a word that's primarily found in Asian markets, but lootboxes are effectively the western equivalent. If they were not the same companies would just be adding gacha to their games to circumvent anti-lootbox laws. Dota 2 and CSGO and TF2 all use what are definitely gacha if you look at how they work, but those are classed as lootboxes. So dispensing with all the semantics that ignore cultural differences, this is just about banning all the lootboxes.

Everyone is overlooking a major difference between gacha in Second Life and a lootbox in more typical games - my understanding is that lootboxes are set up by the game publisher, while in Second Life gacha is set up by end users without a direct connection to Linden Lab.

(By the way - "tidal waves" have nothing to do with tides.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So? I already knew that. English is my native language. It's a synonym for tsunami, and that is a word happens to be a loanword in English. Doesn't seem that inconvenient to ignore the word seeming imperfect. Tsunami literally means harbour wave if broken down and may not necessarily be something happening in a harbour.

But yeah you could argue that and maybe the hammer should come down on the gacha sellers, but LL is also responsible for moderating them, like how gambling proper got regulated into skill gaming regions.

Edited by Desudesudesuka
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something else to consider is that the whole point of the Belgium law is to safeguard children from gambling. 

Source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gaming/news/loot-boxes-investigated-us-blamed-rise-young-gamblers/

The Commission added that the number of problem gamblers aged between 11 and 16 has reached 55,000, with a further 70,000 at risk and 450,000 children said to bet regularly.

The whole focus of these investigations is to ascertain whether children are being targeted. You certainly can't say that gacha creators in SL are targeting children. Even if gacha were a form of gambling, I don't think it is, but if it were determined to be so, it still does not target children.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are going so fast on this one, it would take hours to catch up.  This at the top of page 4, which is the first new post for me.  Almost 4 pages to read.

image.png.adcddfe139c8137076e2b0f114b284b3.png

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

And where the heck is Prok after throwing in this forum bomb?

Waiting in the wings, as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Summarize:

Something called Loot boxes are outlawed in a few places as they are considered to be gambling aimed at children.  Gachas in SL could be characterized as Loot boxes.  Children in SL are rarely actual children.  Someday Gachas might be outlawed in SL (oh my!). Or maybe not. Gambling was outlawed in SL because the laws of California prohibit gambling except in Native American owned Casinos. Nobody knows what may happen in the future.

image.png.c74582da2432db1f4596a9c0d1a04355.png

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

No, because it didnt happen. One can not prove a negative. But seeing as they didnt include SL in their law about lootboxes/gachas one can conclude they didnt see it as an issue. 

So you're saying that because the law doesn't specifically mention Second Life and SL gachas, both are not subject to that law? That's an interpretation/determination that only the court(s) can make. The court's decision won't be based on your interpretation of the law. That's not how it works. But you know that.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I didn't quote you. Forum must have glitched. Whatever is wrong, LL still hasn't fixed it even after running maint earlier. 

 

Have to quote carefully for correct attribution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gabriele Graves said:

And where the heck is Prok after throwing in this forum bomb?

I told you guys in the first page or two that it was a trap. Did anyone listen to me? No. Even I didn't listen to me. So... there you go. 💨

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Have to quote carefully for correct attribution. 

 I quoted ONE person. The same person and the same post in both of the first two quotes. The one person I did NOT quote was Fiona.

Edited by Selene Gregoire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blush Bravin said:

The Commission added that the number of problem gamblers aged between 11 and 16 has reached 55,000, with a further 70,000 at risk and 450,000 children said to bet regularly.

That number for “problem gamblers” does not look too big. I bet iPhone and android games get kids addicted in the first place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

So you're saying that because the law doesn't specifically mention Second Life and SL gachas, both are not subject to that law? That's an interpretation/determination that only the court(s) can make. The court's decision won't be based on your interpretation of the law. That's not how it works. But you know that.

Thats exactly how laws work... If coke, heroin, lsd, crack, meth, and opiates are made illegal but not Marijuana, guess what is legal to smoke? If you don't list something as illegal, it isn't illegal. And yes, the courts would have to rule on it, but that would be to add it to the existing law. Currently, it isn't illegal in any country to play a gacha in SL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

Thats exactly how laws work... If coke, heroin, lsd, crack, meth, and opiates are made illegal but not Marijuana, guess what is legal to smoke? If you don't list something as illegal, it isn't illegal. And yes, the courts would have to rule on it, but that would be to add it to the existing law. Currently, it isn't illegal in any country to play a gacha in SL. 

Oh FFS Drake, No one has said it is! I certainly haven't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Oh FFS Drake, No one has said it is! I certainly haven't.

Do you forget what you say between posts? 

21 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

So you're saying that because the law doesn't specifically mention Second Life and SL gachas, both are not subject to that law?

That right there says that you think they are subject to that law..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Drake1 Nightfire said:

Do you forget what you say between posts? 

That right there says that you think they are subject to that law..  

Now you're grabbing at straws just for the sake of arguing. I grew up around someone like that. I'm not interested in playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kali Wylder said:

To Summarize:

Something called Loot boxes are outlawed in a few places as they are considered to be gambling aimed at children.  Gachas in SL could be characterized as Loot boxes.  Children in SL are rarely actual children.  Someday Gachas might be outlawed in SL (oh my!). Or maybe not. Gambling was outlawed in SL because the laws of California prohibit gambling except in Native American owned Casinos. Nobody knows what may happen in the future.

image.png.c74582da2432db1f4596a9c0d1a04355.png

Why so hasty?  It ain't over 'til it's over!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...