Canada Judge rejects unlawful gambling accusation in EA loot box lawsuit
A Canada judge says that a plaintiff's claim that loot boxes in EA games constitutes 'unlawful gaming' was "bound to fail".
However, Judge Justice Fleming will allow the class-action lawsuit to proceed based on the accusation that loot boxes in EA games may have adopted "deceptive acts or practices".
Plaintiff Mark Sutherland has accused Electronic Arts of "deceptive and unconscionable acts or practices" under British Columbia's Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act. He brought the claim on behalf of all residents in British Columbia who have paid for loot boxes in over 70 EA games since 2008.
As part of the claim, Sutherland alleges that by selling loot boxes, EA has 'engaged in unlawful gaming or gambling' which is in breach of 'multiple offences in Part Seven of the Criminal Code'.
The judge concluded that Sutherland's claim around 'deceptive acts and practices' may proceed. However, the other part of the lawsuit around gambling would not. The plaintiff has been given leave to amend his notice against EA around 'unconscionability', but not "as it relates to allegations of unlawful gaming".
The plaintiff alleged that loot boxes had 'intrinsic' value because they can be sold via in-house actions and third-party marketplaces. However, the judge noted that loot boxes can only be sold via EA's own auctions in exchange for virtual currency.
"Consequently, there is no prospect of gaining, or losing, anything with a real-world value through the defendants’ in-house auctions," the judge stated. "Unlike a casino chip, virtual currency and virtual items in loot boxes can never be 'cashed out' to gain money.
"Given that wagering or a bet must involve the chance of winning or losing real money or money’s worth, in
Read more on gamesindustry.biz
