So they banned Gacha but...

[Stella Carver]

On 5/12/2023 at 3:24 PM, Gwin LeShelle said:

Hey and I'm as social with people that I don't know from RL as it gets for years now lmao 

No we are not talking ... I'm a sad antisocial potato x3

That's my Christmas alt, WinterOnederland!! She's also a sad potato. You and your snoopy plush brightened up the place.

I agree with everything you said about the casino- it's extremely lame, confusing to newbies an overall terrible. I did enjoy the little animations. Anyone who wants to play games for prizes should head over to Merrymount. Their little fair games are fun and give cute little prizes.

[Gwin LeShelle]

6 hours ago, Stella Carver said:

That's my Christmas alt, WinterOnederland!! She's also a sad potato. You and your snoopy plush brightened up the place.

I agree with everything you said about the casino- it's extremely lame, confusing to newbies an overall terrible. I did enjoy the little animations. Anyone who wants to play games for prizes should head over to Merrymount. Their little fair games are fun and give cute little prizes.

Aww that name made me smile when I saw it tho 💜 and Christmas alt gives me ideas haha

I will go and visit Merrymount later, totally forgot about that since RL work days were wild the last 2 weeks.

But not today ..today is mother's day and I have 3 kids, 20, 11 and the little one turned 2 last month. And all three are VERY dedicated to celebrating this day... 😂 I sneaked in the bathroom for 5 free minutes, they have planned every minute today (park, Restaurant, cake...), it's the cutest to see how serious they are about it and they won't let me do ANYthing today they even knocked at the door just now asking if I needed some help there XD 

[Prokofy Neva]

On 5/9/2023 at 5:28 AM, Cinos Field said:

The gacha ban isn't about ethics, it's about following the letter of the law. Gambling in spirit is very much alive on SL, but that particular form of gambling happened to run afoul of some law so they had to remove it. Note that gachas still exist, too, just rebranded to use a loophole where if you can see the next prize, it doesn't count as gambling - even if the idea is obviously that nobody wants that prize and actually pays for a new random one in queue.

There are also a lot of literal casinos on SL where you do play for money, and these avoid violating the gambling laws by introducing any, no matter how insignificant, "skill" element that influences the outcome by a specific, microscopic amount.

It's the same with this. In the ethical/"spirit" sense it's obviously gambling, but because prizes can't be exchanged for money, it doesn't violate that law. Maybe that helps clarify why they'd launch it.

Actually, there isn't any law against gatchas in the US. In fact, two lawsuits launched by parents against Google and Sony over "lootboxes" regarding *children* being deceived by them and running up bills, in fact failed. There wasn't even a prosecutor's warning. This was an example of lawerly due diligence gone wild. The fact that "Japan" or "Germany" supposedly has these laws (and let's get the specifics) doesn't apply to a US registered company; LL doesn't have branches in those countries and PS didn't get prosecutors' warnings from them, either, to our knowledge. 

[EliseAnne85]

53 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Actually, there isn't any law against gatchas in the US. In fact, two lawsuits launched by parents against Google and Sony over "lootboxes" regarding *children* being deceived by them and running up bills, in fact failed. There wasn't even a prosecutor's warning. This was an example of lawerly due diligence gone wild. The fact that "Japan" or "Germany" supposedly has these laws (and let's get the specifics) doesn't apply to a US registered company; LL doesn't have branches in those countries and PS didn't get prosecutors' warnings from them, either, to our knowledge. 

Just to expand on your post with more info, Prokofy...Basically, banning Gacha from SL is because of SL itself then?  They decided that from resident pressure, I'd assume, since real arcades are allowed in RL where the item is not known in the USA.   SL has it in their policy that one cannot sell an item that is not "known", meaning one cannot see it, so doesn't know what it is.  

Here is some copy/paste from LL @Cinos Fieldand all the things one needs to know about why Gacha is banned here in SL, as are any games where the item is unknown.  This copy/paste link I'm pasting below (if one opens it and reads it) states fishing is still allowed because when one buys the bait it is a known item that the purchaser is buying.   I believe we are allowed to give away random prizes, such as a raffle, as long as it's free and equally fair to all to have the same chance.  Or, something like that.  (Link below).   I have eyedrops in my eyes, so I cannot see too well at the moment.  But, here's some copy/paste and a link....

Additional FAQ’s for August 5, 2021:

Q:  Should any newly developed sales mechanism or newly created items be called “gacha” going forward?

A:  No, as we would like to eliminate any confusion with the usage of the term going forward.

Q:  Is a game that requires skill to win the prize you want permitted going forward?  For example, you throw a dart and you must hit a certain number to get the prize corresponding to that number.

A:  This would need to go through the Skilled Game review process and be presented in a Skilled Gaming region, if approved.

Q:  I am selling an item that is known, paid for and delivered to a purchaser, and for each purchaser they are entered into a prize drawing where randomly selected people who bought the item may receive a rare item as a result of the drawing, is this permitted?

A:  You must also provide a free, concise and easy way for anyone to enter into the random drawing with an equal chance to win.

Q:  Can I sell an item, and also then include an unknown random item attached as a bonus? For example, Like a buy one, get one free (BOGO), but the free item is the random/unknown item.

A:  No

Q:  Could a “conveyor belt” system work?  

Example:  The vendor board selects an item at random and displays it for purchase.  That item remains on display and available for purchase until a buyer touches the vendor which locks it to them for purchase.  This allowed the buyer to purchase the item and deliver it.  The vendor unlocks and then selects another item at random and displays it for purchase and the cycle repeats.

Example image here and credit to Nadi Vemo for the approved vendor design.

A:  Yes, as long as the item currently being purchased is known. Note however that you should discontinue the use of the “gacha” term for these sales. 

Q:  But what about breedables (again)?

A:  If you buy a brown cat, and a blue cat (as examples), as long as you knew you were getting a brown cat and a blue cat at the time of sale, this is acceptable at the present including the various unknown traits they may come with or develop.  Secondarily, when those cats make little kittens with unknown outcomes, this is also acceptable.  Lastly, the resale of any breedables will require at the time of purchase that the purchaser knows what they are purchasing at the root level (for example, it is a blue cat).  

Q:  What about my specific idea, you didn’t cover it here?

A:  We wish we could cover all the great ideas we’ve seen proposed to date. Sadly we can’t address them all and if there are any questions or proposed ideas that would suggest any other permutations on the policy, we recommend a simple and thoughtful approach to stay within the boundaries of the policy.  Failing that, please feel free to contact customer support.

If we see more areas that we need to cover, we will look at doing another FAQ update next week.

Edited May 15, 2023 by EliseAnne85

[SpiritSparrow Skydancer]

this made me very angry when I saw that LL was promoting this sort of thing...  I saw this on twitter and was like WTF<

[SpiritSparrow Skydancer]

2 hours ago, EliseAnne85 said:

Just to expand on your post with more info, Prokofy...Basically, banning Gacha from SL is because of SL itself then?  They decided that from resident pressure, I'd assume, since real arcades are allowed in RL where the item is not known in the USA.   SL has it in their policy that one cannot sell an item that is not "known", meaning one cannot see it, so doesn't know what it is.  

Here is some copy/paste from LL @Cinos Field

maybe just a link would have worked....

Edited May 16, 2023 by SpiritSparrow Skydancer
But you have great cut and paste skills. ; )

[diamond Marchant]

4 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Actually, there isn't any law against gatchas in the US.

That is a fact.

To further expand on Prok's post, I have always found it ironic (if not hypocritical) that gatcha was banned yet Game of Homes persists. I hold that neither meet a common definition of gambling (pay money to win/not win a prize based on chance) as in both gatcha and Game of Homes, there is no losing, rather, there is a assignment of a prize based on chance. Game of Homes feels more gamble-y to me as you don't even know all the homes in the queue when you make your play. In gatcha, you always know the possible items to be delivered.

I also hold that the fact that gatch items are transfer is a red herring and actually makes gatcha LESS gamble-y, because if you don't like the item delivered, you can sell it and get your money back (sometimes).

Finally, the rare vs. common aspect of gatcha also is present in Game of Homes, as their are clearly more desirable homes and less desirable homes. In both cases, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[Persephone Emerald]

No one pays to get a Linden Home, nor are they able to resell what they get. Being able to select a Linden Home is a perk of Premium membership. If one chooses to do so, they can keep trying for a new location 5 times each day, so there is no loss in not getting the precise location one wanted to get.

[Alwin Alcott]

2 hours ago, diamond Marchant said:

yet Game of Homes persists

i play the GoH for quite a while .. i just like change decor and surrounding area, and i have a preference for waterside at multiple sides of the homes.
After a while i move again because of the many sorts of landscaping in Belli. For me it's no gacha, but  a possibility to change, build in the system of assignment of homes.
You win nothing, and it costs nothing because the ones playing it are already premium.
The chance to get a desired location within a few days (sometimes longer)is a lot higher than a chance to win a rare gacha that could be gamed by the seller, the homes aren't unless LL made a algorithm to do so, but think they could expect pitchforks feathers and tar fast if someone finds that. (while with gacha everybody accepted gaming)
And GoH is not possible to go over your bounderies.. there's a limit of 5 a day as Persephone also already said.

[Love Zhaoying]

8 hours ago, EliseAnne85 said:

Just to expand on your post with more info, Prokofy...Basically, banning Gacha from SL is because of SL itself then?  They decided that from resident pressure, I'd assume, since real arcades are allowed in RL where the item is not known in the USA.   SL has it in their policy that one cannot sell an item that is not "known", meaning one cannot see it, so doesn't know what it is.  

Here is some copy/paste from LL @Cinos Fieldand all the things one needs to know about why Gacha is banned here in SL, as are any games where the item is unknown.  This copy/paste link I'm pasting below (if one opens it and reads it) states fishing is still allowed because when one buys the bait it is a known item that the purchaser is buying.   I believe we are allowed to give away random prizes, such as a raffle, as long as it's free and equally fair to all to have the same chance.  Or, something like that.  (Link below).   I have eyedrops in my eyes, so I cannot see too well at the moment.  But, here's some copy/paste and a link....

Additional FAQ’s for August 5, 2021:

Q:  Should any newly developed sales mechanism or newly created items be called “gacha” going forward?

A:  No, as we would like to eliminate any confusion with the usage of the term going forward.

Q:  Is a game that requires skill to win the prize you want permitted going forward?  For example, you throw a dart and you must hit a certain number to get the prize corresponding to that number.

A:  This would need to go through the Skilled Game review process and be presented in a Skilled Gaming region, if approved.

Q:  I am selling an item that is known, paid for and delivered to a purchaser, and for each purchaser they are entered into a prize drawing where randomly selected people who bought the item may receive a rare item as a result of the drawing, is this permitted?

A:  You must also provide a free, concise and easy way for anyone to enter into the random drawing with an equal chance to win.

Q:  Can I sell an item, and also then include an unknown random item attached as a bonus? For example, Like a buy one, get one free (BOGO), but the free item is the random/unknown item.

A:  No

Q:  Could a “conveyor belt” system work?  

Example:  The vendor board selects an item at random and displays it for purchase.  That item remains on display and available for purchase until a buyer touches the vendor which locks it to them for purchase.  This allowed the buyer to purchase the item and deliver it.  The vendor unlocks and then selects another item at random and displays it for purchase and the cycle repeats.

Example image here and credit to Nadi Vemo for the approved vendor design.

A:  Yes, as long as the item currently being purchased is known. Note however that you should discontinue the use of the “gacha” term for these sales. 

Q:  But what about breedables (again)?

A:  If you buy a brown cat, and a blue cat (as examples), as long as you knew you were getting a brown cat and a blue cat at the time of sale, this is acceptable at the present including the various unknown traits they may come with or develop.  Secondarily, when those cats make little kittens with unknown outcomes, this is also acceptable.  Lastly, the resale of any breedables will require at the time of purchase that the purchaser knows what they are purchasing at the root level (for example, it is a blue cat).  

Q:  What about my specific idea, you didn’t cover it here?

A:  We wish we could cover all the great ideas we’ve seen proposed to date. Sadly we can’t address them all and if there are any questions or proposed ideas that would suggest any other permutations on the policy, we recommend a simple and thoughtful approach to stay within the boundaries of the policy.  Failing that, please feel free to contact customer support.

If we see more areas that we need to cover, we will look at doing another FAQ update next week.

Ow, my eyes.

When pasting text, please do not keep formatting. It is very hard on those of us who use "Dark Mode". All you have to do is click the right thing after pasting- you are prompted for it every single time you paste.

All that whining aside, thanks for posting the text, there is no way I was going to read the info at the link. 

Remind me, what does ANY of this have to do with the Social Casino, which is not "gambling" because you don't "get anything", and not like "gachas" because you don't "get anything"?

[Jaylinbridges]

3 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Remind me, what does ANY of this have to do with the Social Casino, which is not "gambling" because you don't "get anything", and not like "gachas" because you don't "get anything"?

There is no relation between the two.  Just the pro and anti gacha crowd wanting to bring up gacha again.

Social Casinos claim it is not gambling since there are no payouts for the coins/chips/tokens you buy with real money.  It is a loophole to avoid online gambling laws and regulations.  Some clever guy from New Jersey started the Online Casino loophole about 12 years ago.  It is now a big business, based on the billions that addicts and whales spend to buy the coins.  Somewhere around 9% of all players actually spend real money on this game, and that is where the Billions in profits come from.  See the YouTube videos in the actual social casino is gambling thread, not this one.

Edited May 16, 2023 by Jaylinbridges

[Sid Nagy]

13 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Actually, there isn't any law against gatchas in the US. In fact, two lawsuits launched by parents against Google and Sony over "lootboxes" regarding *children* being deceived by them and running up bills, in fact failed. There wasn't even a prosecutor's warning. This was an example of lawerly due diligence gone wild. The fact that "Japan" or "Germany" supposedly has these laws (and let's get the specifics) doesn't apply to a US registered company; LL doesn't have branches in those countries and PS didn't get prosecutors' warnings from them, either, to our knowledge. 

As a globally working company, LL needs to comply with other rules from other parts of the world as well.
If they have to give up business with customers in the Japan and the EU, that costs them a pretty nice chunk of income.

The moment you deliver services to someone for instance in the EU, you have to comply with the EU rules.It is the same as with VAT. LL has no other choice than to comply with the EU laws or do no business with people from inside the EU.

Indian pharmacists can't sell medication prescription free through their websites in the EU that are only available on prescription in the EU, although it is prescription free on the Indian market.

The country where the company is registered is of no importance IMHO, the country where the goods are delivered is.

If LL would only cater to people inside the USA, they of course would not have to bother about laws in other parts of the world.

Edited May 16, 2023 by Sid Nagy

[Arduenn Schwartzman]

13 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

The fact that "Japan" or "Germany" supposedly has these laws (and let's get the specifics) doesn't apply to a US registered company; LL doesn't have branches in those countries and PS didn't get prosecutors' warnings from them, either, to our knowledge.

In Belgium, loot boxes and similar game mechanics are already forbidden. In the Netherlands partially so. In these countries, Second Life faces a potential ban with such legislation. So it may be legal to have Gachas on Second Life soil, but by keeping them there, Linden Lab risks losing a significant portion of its residents. And it's not stopping with the lower countries either...

Quote

Gaming’s most controversial economy, the Loot Box and its random-related brethren [Gachas!], are once again the target of European councils, who are calling for new legislation for the controversial in-game purchase mechanic.

https://www.destructoid.com/european-countries-back-report-against-loot-box-gacha-controversy/

 

[Love Zhaoying]

57 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

As a globally working company, LL needs to comply with other rules from other parts of the world as well.
If they have to give up business with customers in the Japan and the EU, that costs them a pretty nice chunk of income.

The moment you deliver services to someone for instance in the EU, you have to comply with the EU rules.It is the same as with VAT. LL has no other choice than to comply with the EU laws or do no business with people from inside the EU.

Indian pharmacists can't sell medication prescription free through their websites in the EU that are only available on prescription in the EU, although it is prescription free on the Indian market.

The country where the company is registered is of no importance IMHO, the country where the goods are delivered is.

If LL would only cater to people inside the USA, they of course would not have to bother about laws in other parts of the world.

..all they have to do is keep people registered in certain countries out of the "Social Casino" regions.

If certain "other" things are available "everywhere" in Second Life but illegal "some places", I don't see how LL will protect people in "those places" from exposure to those things. (For example, "naughty things".)   

I think I understand your point, but unfortunately, the Internet isn't built in such a way as to prevent users in some countries from access to certain websites, unless their countries have a country-wide firewall, etc.

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

In Belgium, loot boxes and similar game mechanics are already forbidden. In the Netherlands partially so. In these countries, Second Life faces a potential ban with such legislation. So it may be legal to have Gachas on Second Life soil, but by keeping them there, Linden Lab risks losing a significant portion of its residents. And it's not stopping with the lower countries either...

I read (somehow) in EliseAnne's blinding quote that LL specifically said, (paraphrasing) "whatever you do, don't call it a gacha!!".

Sneaky.

[Sid Nagy]

36 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

..all they have to do is keep people registered in certain countries out of the "Social Casino" regions.

If certain "other" things are available "everywhere" in Second Life but illegal "some places", I don't see how LL will protect people in "those places" from exposure to those things. (For example, "naughty things".)   

I think I understand your point, but unfortunately, the Internet isn't built in such a way as to prevent users in some countries from access to certain websites, unless their countries have a country-wide firewall, etc.

The EU and other countries have means to enforce their laws even with companies from countries on the other side of the world.
Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft and others all payed millions and millions in fines already to the EU for not complying to the EU laws, while offering their services to EU residents.

And I think that LL is smart enough to know from what parts of the world large chunks of their money comes from so they adapt to those rules as much as the rules of their own country. So that means collecting the VAT,  changing the gacha rules, no gambling.

There are international laws about that.
"We are registered in (name of country) so have a nice day over there", won't hold in courts.
Neither in the USA or elsewhere. Because the USA and most other countries protect their citizens in the same way from companies outside their own country. Comply to te national laws of (name of the country) or face the lawsuits and penalties and fines when you try to deliver your goods anyway.

American companies can't sell guns to European citizens, Indians can't sell certain medicines to the USA or the EU without prescriptions. The Dutch legalized gambling sides can't offer their products in the USA without complying to the rules of the USA.

Rule of thumb worldwide: One has to comply as a company to the laws of the country where one delivers the goods to. LL delivers digital goods.

 

Edited May 16, 2023 by Sid Nagy

[Qie Niangao]

The more I read, the more I'm thinking this social casino business may simply replace Second Life. Once SL is mobile, in-world social casinos will catch on.

Can operating thousands of simulators for the Land product make margin remotely comparable to money for nothing casinos? Do they want to distract the gambling addicts with anything other than buying and feeding tokens into the slots? Can't afford the time wasted on decorating Land—or dolling up avatars on Marketplace, for that matter.

So if Oberwager can run social casinos somewhere and can't in the EU, it'll be buh-bye EU.

[Love Zhaoying]

22 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said:

The EU and other countries have means to enforce their laws even with companies from countries on the other side of the world.

Then, LL has nothing to worry about! Enforcement will take care of it.

And LL will "comply with all applicable International laws"!

Easy.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

35 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

The more I read, the more I'm thinking this social casino business may simply replace Second Life. Once SL is mobile, in-world social casinos will catch on.

I dunno. I think they would have to be a lot more attractive, from a visuals/gameplay POV, for all of that. 

Why would someone go through the trouble of getting in-world, setting themselves up with an avatar, navigating to the casino via search/teleport/walking, etc. etc. when they could just fire up an app and be playing in mere seconds? I mean, if indeed social casinos are all about that rush to play. There's no real need for an avatar at all.

The more I learn about these things, though, the further away from them I want to be, so if this becomes a permanent thing in SL and more start popping up, well... 

[Qie Niangao]

16 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

Why would someone go through the trouble of getting in-world, setting themselves up with an avatar, navigating to the casino via search/teleport/walking, etc. etc. when they could just fire up an app and be playing in mere seconds? I mean, if indeed social casinos are all about that rush to play. There's no real need for an avatar at all.

That's what I'm saying. Welcome to Second Life 2.0.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

1 minute ago, Qie Niangao said:

That's what I'm saying. Welcome to Second Life 2.0.

You think they'd yeet everything into space and just go for a gambling app model/format? Hmm...I think they'd probably want to test that with a free app on the side first, marketed specifically to that group. I might be wrong, but I don't think we're the same kind of audience. I LIKE shopping for hair, dangit! 😄

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

Hmm...I think they'd probably want to test that with a free app on the side first, marketed specifically to that group.

I guess we'll find out how "Social Casino" works on the new Mobile client!

"There's an App for that" - Sesame Street.

 

[Qie Niangao]

4 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

You think they'd yeet everything into space and just go for a gambling app model/format? Hmm...I think they'd probably want to test that with a free app on the side first, marketed specifically to that group. I might be wrong, but I don't think we're the same kind of audience. I LIKE shopping for hair, dangit! 😄

Yes, but the very fact this social casino thing exists in SL suggests to me that Oberwager is hunting for something that will create a huge market for Tilia and it's now pretty clear that thing won't be a Tilia-shaped slice of the grand metaverse. Will those owners sustain an interest in an aging virtual world platform if the social gaming thing takes off?

Maybe, especially if something about the SL avatars and "land" encourages emerging gambling addicts to allow themselves to play the social slots, where those same individuals wouldn't feel permitted to just play a simple mobile app.

If this is the direction ahead, hair shopping will be an available Second Life activity exactly to the extent it gets gamblers to buy and wager tokens.

[Skyler Pancake]

11 hours ago, Persephone Emerald said:

No one pays to get a Linden Home, nor are they able to resell what they get. Being able to select a Linden Home is a perk of Premium membership. If one chooses to do so, they can keep trying for a new location 5 times each day, so there is no loss in not getting the precise location one wanted to get.

You do pay though. You pay via your monthly subscription fee.

Also, there is the potential to "sell" your Linden Home now. Premium Plus members can actually request which parcel they want directly. So if there was an already owned parcel you really wanted, you could message the owner, offer them a payment to abandon the parcel, and then immediately call up concierges and request it for yourself.

[Love Zhaoying]

13 minutes ago, Skyler Pancake said:

So if there was an already owned parcel you really wanted, you could message the owner, offer them a payment to abandon the parcel, and then immediately call up concierges and request it for yourself.

Don't you suppose this is against some TOS?  At the very least, if the "buyer" complained, there is nothing LL could (or would) do about it.