Valve Counters NY Loot Box Lawsuit With Official Motion To Dismiss

In February, we reported on Valve’s latest legal troubles: A lawsuit brought forward by the New York State Attorney General, Letitia James, who claims that the loot box and community market systems in games like Counter-Strike amount to “quintessential gambling,” and expose children and adolescents to potential gambling addiction later in life. Valve later issued a public statement dismissing the contents of the lawsuit and arguing that loot boxes are no different from physical blind-box goods, like trading cards and Labubus. Loot boxes have been controversial in gaming for almost as long as they’ve been around, and this lawsuit has sparked discussions about how they could be inherently predatory, but ultimately, it seems as though Valve’s argument centers around the letter of the law as much as the practical applications. According to a recent filing in the New York Supreme Court, Valve is seeking to dismiss the lawsuit based on a version of the same argument presented in the aforementioned statement and interpretation of what constitutes gambling.

Valve’s motion to dismiss argues that mystery boxes are not classified as gambling under New York constitutional or statutory law, arguing that “The New York Court of Appeals has interpreted “gambling” under section 9 of the New York Constitution to prohibit ‘the risking of money or something of value on games of chance, as well as bets and wagers by nonparticipants on competitions of skill.'” and that “Valve’s offering of mystery boxes does not ‘promote gambling’ under any plausible reading of these provisions because player does not ‘stake or risk’ anything when purchasing a mystery box, a skin is not ‘something of value,’ and there is no wager ‘agreement’ between a player and Valve.” The argument also postulates that skins do not qualify as “something of value” by the verbiage of New York’s gambling law, arguing that “mystery boxes are not things of value because a ‘virtual in-game item or feature designed or perceived to enhance gameplay’ ‘can only be used within the games themselves,'” and that “a skin is not money or property.”