Would Poker (with *Zero* real-world currency involved) in an M-Rated (18+) Online game be constituted Online Gambling?Can online gambling sites bias their games?How are MMOs with real money economies allowed to operate?Is online gambling for points legal when those points can be used to purchase merchandise?Whom should I contact if I want to create a legal gambling business with an offshore company?If I turn the real money into fake currency will it still be gambling app?Exploiting online video games illegal, a tort, or allowable under the law?Non real currency gambling website
What (if any) is the reason to buy in small local stores?
Did I make a mistake by ccing email to boss to others?
Showing mass murder in a kid's book
Center page as a whole without centering each element individually
Why didn't Voldemort know what Grindelwald looked like?
Should a narrator ever describe things based on a character's view instead of facts?
Derivative of an interpolated function
Capacitor electron flow
How do I lift the insulation blower into the attic?
If the Dominion rule using their Jem'Hadar troops, why is their life expectancy so low?
python displays `n` instead of breaking a line
Are hand made posters acceptable in Academia?
What's the meaning of "what it means for something to be something"?
What do the positive and negative (+/-) transmit and receive pins mean on Ethernet cables?
Friend wants my recommendation but I don't want to give it to him
Why does the frost depth increase when the surface temperature warms up?
How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?
Does capillary rise violate hydrostatic paradox?
Air travel with refrigerated insulin
How can a new country break out from a developed country without war?
Is there any common country to visit for persons holding UK and Schengen visas?
Weird lines in Microsoft Word
Can a Knock spell open the door to Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion?
Is divisi notation needed for brass or woodwind in an orchestra?
Would Poker (with *Zero* real-world currency involved) in an M-Rated (18+) Online game be constituted Online Gambling?
Can online gambling sites bias their games?How are MMOs with real money economies allowed to operate?Is online gambling for points legal when those points can be used to purchase merchandise?Whom should I contact if I want to create a legal gambling business with an offshore company?If I turn the real money into fake currency will it still be gambling app?Exploiting online video games illegal, a tort, or allowable under the law?Non real currency gambling website
Players of Red Dead Redemption 2: Online (RDO from now on) have been requesting that Poker or other gambling activities be added to the game.
These were expected to be included, as they are present in the Single Player, and in the predecessor Red Dead Redemption.
Many players of the game are suggesting that Poker or other gambling activities can not be included because of legal restrictions on Online Gambling.
Notably, RDO features two forms of currency. In-game "Cash", and "Gold". While Gold can be purchased with real money (Micro-transactions), the In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be purchased with real money. “Cash” can also not be redeemed for real-world money, prizes, or anything else.
Transferring of currency is currently not something available in the game.
“Cash” is earned in all activities of the game, and no prizes would be tied specifically to the game of poker.
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
Of note:
RDO is an M-Rated (18+) game.
With conservative Pot Limits gambling would be a vastly slower way to earn in-game “Cash” compared to other activities in-game.
gambling
New contributor
add a comment |
Players of Red Dead Redemption 2: Online (RDO from now on) have been requesting that Poker or other gambling activities be added to the game.
These were expected to be included, as they are present in the Single Player, and in the predecessor Red Dead Redemption.
Many players of the game are suggesting that Poker or other gambling activities can not be included because of legal restrictions on Online Gambling.
Notably, RDO features two forms of currency. In-game "Cash", and "Gold". While Gold can be purchased with real money (Micro-transactions), the In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be purchased with real money. “Cash” can also not be redeemed for real-world money, prizes, or anything else.
Transferring of currency is currently not something available in the game.
“Cash” is earned in all activities of the game, and no prizes would be tied specifically to the game of poker.
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
Of note:
RDO is an M-Rated (18+) game.
With conservative Pot Limits gambling would be a vastly slower way to earn in-game “Cash” compared to other activities in-game.
gambling
New contributor
add a comment |
Players of Red Dead Redemption 2: Online (RDO from now on) have been requesting that Poker or other gambling activities be added to the game.
These were expected to be included, as they are present in the Single Player, and in the predecessor Red Dead Redemption.
Many players of the game are suggesting that Poker or other gambling activities can not be included because of legal restrictions on Online Gambling.
Notably, RDO features two forms of currency. In-game "Cash", and "Gold". While Gold can be purchased with real money (Micro-transactions), the In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be purchased with real money. “Cash” can also not be redeemed for real-world money, prizes, or anything else.
Transferring of currency is currently not something available in the game.
“Cash” is earned in all activities of the game, and no prizes would be tied specifically to the game of poker.
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
Of note:
RDO is an M-Rated (18+) game.
With conservative Pot Limits gambling would be a vastly slower way to earn in-game “Cash” compared to other activities in-game.
gambling
New contributor
Players of Red Dead Redemption 2: Online (RDO from now on) have been requesting that Poker or other gambling activities be added to the game.
These were expected to be included, as they are present in the Single Player, and in the predecessor Red Dead Redemption.
Many players of the game are suggesting that Poker or other gambling activities can not be included because of legal restrictions on Online Gambling.
Notably, RDO features two forms of currency. In-game "Cash", and "Gold". While Gold can be purchased with real money (Micro-transactions), the In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be purchased with real money. “Cash” can also not be redeemed for real-world money, prizes, or anything else.
Transferring of currency is currently not something available in the game.
“Cash” is earned in all activities of the game, and no prizes would be tied specifically to the game of poker.
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
Of note:
RDO is an M-Rated (18+) game.
With conservative Pot Limits gambling would be a vastly slower way to earn in-game “Cash” compared to other activities in-game.
gambling
gambling
New contributor
New contributor
edited 3 hours ago
SchrodingersStat
New contributor
asked 5 hours ago
SchrodingersStatSchrodingersStat
1064
1064
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
It is hard to give a comprehensive answer because laws vary significantly among countries. I will focus on U.S. law, but other countries very likely adopt a more stringent definition of gambling (Muslim nations are at one extreme of the spectrum, since their religion prohibits games of chance).
Under U.S. law (or at least in some of its jurisdictions) the scheme you outline would not meet the legal definition of gambling. The Black's Law Dictionary defines gamble as "[t]o play, or game [...] involv[ing],not only chance, but a hope of gaining something beyond the amount played".
For a more formalized characterization of gambling, see Com. v. Irwin, 535 Pa. 524, 527 (1993):
The three elements of gambling are (1) consideration; (2) a result
determined by chance rather than skill; and (3) reward
There, the court distinguishes between reward and entertainment in that in the latter "the player can never "win" anything other than a prize worth less than the amount he has played", Id. at 529.
This is consistent with the case law from other jurisdictions. See Farina v. Kelly, 147 Conn. 444, 449 (1960):
[A] lottery is characterized by three constituent elements, namely, a
prize, a chance, and a price. [...] [A]s commonly understood, gambling
involves not only chance but a hope of gaining something beyond the
amount played
Lastly, since
In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be
purchased with real money
it is evident that the purpose of adding Poker the game in the way you describe is pure entertainment, not for a player's expectation of reward as outlined in the aforementioned cases.
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
1
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
SchrodingersStat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38257%2fwould-poker-with-zero-real-world-currency-involved-in-an-m-rated-18-onlin%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
It is hard to give a comprehensive answer because laws vary significantly among countries. I will focus on U.S. law, but other countries very likely adopt a more stringent definition of gambling (Muslim nations are at one extreme of the spectrum, since their religion prohibits games of chance).
Under U.S. law (or at least in some of its jurisdictions) the scheme you outline would not meet the legal definition of gambling. The Black's Law Dictionary defines gamble as "[t]o play, or game [...] involv[ing],not only chance, but a hope of gaining something beyond the amount played".
For a more formalized characterization of gambling, see Com. v. Irwin, 535 Pa. 524, 527 (1993):
The three elements of gambling are (1) consideration; (2) a result
determined by chance rather than skill; and (3) reward
There, the court distinguishes between reward and entertainment in that in the latter "the player can never "win" anything other than a prize worth less than the amount he has played", Id. at 529.
This is consistent with the case law from other jurisdictions. See Farina v. Kelly, 147 Conn. 444, 449 (1960):
[A] lottery is characterized by three constituent elements, namely, a
prize, a chance, and a price. [...] [A]s commonly understood, gambling
involves not only chance but a hope of gaining something beyond the
amount played
Lastly, since
In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be
purchased with real money
it is evident that the purpose of adding Poker the game in the way you describe is pure entertainment, not for a player's expectation of reward as outlined in the aforementioned cases.
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
1
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
It is hard to give a comprehensive answer because laws vary significantly among countries. I will focus on U.S. law, but other countries very likely adopt a more stringent definition of gambling (Muslim nations are at one extreme of the spectrum, since their religion prohibits games of chance).
Under U.S. law (or at least in some of its jurisdictions) the scheme you outline would not meet the legal definition of gambling. The Black's Law Dictionary defines gamble as "[t]o play, or game [...] involv[ing],not only chance, but a hope of gaining something beyond the amount played".
For a more formalized characterization of gambling, see Com. v. Irwin, 535 Pa. 524, 527 (1993):
The three elements of gambling are (1) consideration; (2) a result
determined by chance rather than skill; and (3) reward
There, the court distinguishes between reward and entertainment in that in the latter "the player can never "win" anything other than a prize worth less than the amount he has played", Id. at 529.
This is consistent with the case law from other jurisdictions. See Farina v. Kelly, 147 Conn. 444, 449 (1960):
[A] lottery is characterized by three constituent elements, namely, a
prize, a chance, and a price. [...] [A]s commonly understood, gambling
involves not only chance but a hope of gaining something beyond the
amount played
Lastly, since
In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be
purchased with real money
it is evident that the purpose of adding Poker the game in the way you describe is pure entertainment, not for a player's expectation of reward as outlined in the aforementioned cases.
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
1
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
It is hard to give a comprehensive answer because laws vary significantly among countries. I will focus on U.S. law, but other countries very likely adopt a more stringent definition of gambling (Muslim nations are at one extreme of the spectrum, since their religion prohibits games of chance).
Under U.S. law (or at least in some of its jurisdictions) the scheme you outline would not meet the legal definition of gambling. The Black's Law Dictionary defines gamble as "[t]o play, or game [...] involv[ing],not only chance, but a hope of gaining something beyond the amount played".
For a more formalized characterization of gambling, see Com. v. Irwin, 535 Pa. 524, 527 (1993):
The three elements of gambling are (1) consideration; (2) a result
determined by chance rather than skill; and (3) reward
There, the court distinguishes between reward and entertainment in that in the latter "the player can never "win" anything other than a prize worth less than the amount he has played", Id. at 529.
This is consistent with the case law from other jurisdictions. See Farina v. Kelly, 147 Conn. 444, 449 (1960):
[A] lottery is characterized by three constituent elements, namely, a
prize, a chance, and a price. [...] [A]s commonly understood, gambling
involves not only chance but a hope of gaining something beyond the
amount played
Lastly, since
In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be
purchased with real money
it is evident that the purpose of adding Poker the game in the way you describe is pure entertainment, not for a player's expectation of reward as outlined in the aforementioned cases.
If Poker was to be included, and restricted to only In-Game "Cash", would this be an issue regarding Online Gambling laws in a significant number of countries?
It is hard to give a comprehensive answer because laws vary significantly among countries. I will focus on U.S. law, but other countries very likely adopt a more stringent definition of gambling (Muslim nations are at one extreme of the spectrum, since their religion prohibits games of chance).
Under U.S. law (or at least in some of its jurisdictions) the scheme you outline would not meet the legal definition of gambling. The Black's Law Dictionary defines gamble as "[t]o play, or game [...] involv[ing],not only chance, but a hope of gaining something beyond the amount played".
For a more formalized characterization of gambling, see Com. v. Irwin, 535 Pa. 524, 527 (1993):
The three elements of gambling are (1) consideration; (2) a result
determined by chance rather than skill; and (3) reward
There, the court distinguishes between reward and entertainment in that in the latter "the player can never "win" anything other than a prize worth less than the amount he has played", Id. at 529.
This is consistent with the case law from other jurisdictions. See Farina v. Kelly, 147 Conn. 444, 449 (1960):
[A] lottery is characterized by three constituent elements, namely, a
prize, a chance, and a price. [...] [A]s commonly understood, gambling
involves not only chance but a hope of gaining something beyond the
amount played
Lastly, since
In-Game "Cash" has zero interaction with Gold, and can not be
purchased with real money
it is evident that the purpose of adding Poker the game in the way you describe is pure entertainment, not for a player's expectation of reward as outlined in the aforementioned cases.
answered 4 hours ago
Iñaki ViggersIñaki Viggers
9,46021127
9,46021127
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
1
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
1
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
This assumes tht the in-game "cash" not only cannot be bought, but that it cannot be redeemed for actual money or other things of value. It further seems to assume that in-game "cash " cannot be transferred from one player to another, in a way which might be done as part of an out-of-game transaction for real money.. Otherwise the "cash" might be considered a reward beyond entertainment.
– David Siegel
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel Even if in-game "cash" were redeemed for actual money or things of value, it would still be legal as long as the value obtained does not match or exceed the amount the player paid (see the excerpt of Com. v. Irwin at 529). Whether or not players arrange for an out-of-game transaction, that is beyond the [online game] supplier's responsibility.
– Iñaki Viggers
3 hours ago
1
1
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
@David Siegel, it doesn’t assume that the currency can not be bought or redeemed for actual money or things of value. These are facts stated in my question. Regarding the selling of in-game currency for real currency, there is no way to transfer currency (this is actually my assumed reason why it is not included) however poker style games would certainly create a means for this. However, given that “selling” the currency would violate the game’s rules (as is the case in most online games), would that not matter?
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
1
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
@DavidSiegel The title clearly says “Zero real-world currency involved.” Although I will say, I appreciate the conservative approach. Given Europe has stricter gambling regulations, a strict view is appreciated.
– SchrodingersStat
3 hours ago
1
1
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
@SchrodingersStat : I am just trying to point out the kinds of issues a possibly hostile regulator might raise. Regulators are well aware that some people promote illegal activity while claiming to do no such thing.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
SchrodingersStat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SchrodingersStat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SchrodingersStat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
SchrodingersStat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38257%2fwould-poker-with-zero-real-world-currency-involved-in-an-m-rated-18-onlin%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown