Comment

Comment on New York sues Valve for enabling "illegal gambling" with loot boxes

None of this is exclusive to Valve. Yeah, people can technically buy hardware and sell it, but they can also gift games or whatever and people were already using third party websites to sell their items for cash.

And MMOs with random drops have historically always had an RMT market that is against the TOS where people sell in game currency or items for real currency.

I’m not saying that valve should be let off the hook when it comes to loot boxes, but this lawsuit kind of stinks because it is all over the place and again, valve isn’t the worst example of what they describe.

The fact that it’s framed as “protecting children” and claims that valve is intentionally targeting children despite the games in question being rated M and old enough that I seriously doubt there are that many minors playing is putting a ton of red flags up for me. They also add the 90s era “violent video game” rhetoric that was always nonsense.

The conspiracy part of me thinks this is going to eventually lead to more age verification BS and they are targeting valve because it is the only company that is complying in a way that still protects user privacy.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Goodeye8@piefed.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

None of this is exclusive to Valve. Yeah, people can technically buy hardware and sell it, but they can also gift games or whatever and people were already using third party websites to sell their items for cash.

Lootboxes are not specific to Valve, but the way Valve has implemented lootboxes is very distinct. And I know that third party sites have been selling the skins for cash for years at this point, but that has been happening outside Valve’s ecosystem. IMO Valve should’ve been held accountable for that years ago but so far they’ve been able to skirt the law.

And MMOs with random drops have historically always had an RMT market that is against the TOS where people sell in game currency or items for real currency.

Which is part of why I said the way Valve does things is unique to Valve, because Valve does (for the most part) offer the infrastucture for all the trading except for turning Steam credit back into real money. IMO RMT shouldn’t exist either but that is not something you legally push onto developer because like you said, it is against the TOS so players are doing something the developer has already said they shouldn’t be doing.

I’m not saying that valve should be let off the hook when it comes to loot boxes, but this lawsuit kind of stinks because it is all over the place and again, valve isn’t the worst example of what they describe.

Valve isn’t the worst example but they are one of the few companies where there’s now some legal ground to go after the gambling, and when it comes to gambling Valve is a pretty big player. Ideally we should go after all of these companies but what is morally right and legally right doesn’t really match when it comes to gambling.

The fact that it’s framed as “protecting children” and claims that valve is intentionally targeting children despite the games in question being rated M and old enough that I seriously doubt there are that many minors playing is putting a ton of red flags up for me. They also add the 90s era “violent video game” rhetoric that was always nonsense.

I could see where you’re coming from but I personally didn’t see the lawsuit this way. Children are a point to bring up because we shouldn’t be normalizing gambling for children, but overall I see the suit as taking an issue with the gambling aspect of the lootboxes. We don’t know the exact number of minors playing but there’s enough for them to get into the competitive scene of CS, there are players who entered T1 of CS while still being minors.

Not sure from where you’re taking the violent video game rhetoric as I didn’t notice that in the actual lawsuit.

The conspiracy part of me thinks this is going to eventually lead to more age verification BS and they are targeting valve because it is the only company that is complying in a way that still protects user privacy.

I get the risk of pushing more age verification BS but I think that’s unavoidable when companies decide to get into gambling. Age verification for gambling has been around before the world wide web was even a thing. I see this more as playing hardball by stating that if Valve wants to partake in gambling then gambling laws should apply to Valve. They can’t legally force Valve to implement age verification unless Valve decides to double down on the gambling. Valve could just as easily prevent age verification by removing gambling from their platform. I don’t think Valve should get a free pass on gambling just because there’s a risk of someone malicious trying to push age verification through this door. Valve opened that door when they decided to implement gambling.

source