After the New York Attorney General’s Office sued Valve in February over gambling allegations, the Steam operators have now spoken out with a statement defending their loot boxes.
Valve is currently facing a lot of trouble in the U.S. The New York State Attorney General considers the loot boxes used by the publisher of Counter-Strike, Dota, and Team Fortress to be a form of illegal gambling and has therefore filed a lawsuit against Valve.
According to the prosecutor’s office, the publisher not only violates legal requirements for gambling with loot boxes, but also accepts that children will become addicted to gaming as a result of these mechanisms. The aim of the lawsuit is to force Valve to remove the boxes from its games and pay compensation to all affected New York Steam users.
Two weeks after the lawsuit was filed, Valve has now commented on the allegations for the first time.
Like Pokémon cards or Labubus?In a public statement on Steam’s support page, Valve states that it does not believe that the so-called mystery boxes violate New York State law. They also expressed disappointment over the escalation to court, even though Valve had done its utmost to educate the prosecutor’s office on the nature of virtual items and mystery boxes.Q
According to Valve’s statement, the company was first contacted by the prosecutor’s office in early 2023. They attempted to make it clear to the authorities that loot boxes are a common practice these days, “not only in video games, but also in real life.”
In its statement, the publisher refers to Pokémon or Magic cards, as well as Labubus, which operate on the same principle:
They all come in a sealed box; the customer does not know in advance what is contained in the package.
Since Valve’s loot boxes only contain cosmetic items, players who do not purchase the boxes are not at a disadvantage. Furthermore, no one is forced to open the boxes.
We do not cooperate with gambling sites
Valve also points to its strict stance against real-world gambling on third-party platforms that use in-game items from Valve games. According to the publisher, this is a clear violation of the Steam Terms of Service.
The makers of Steam have banned over a million accounts so far because users misused them for gambling, fraud, or theft. Valve has also implemented features such as trading restrictions to make life difficult for dubious third-party providers and gambling sites.Controversy: Community Marketplace
Valve is particularly vehement in its opposition to the prosecutor’s demand to completely ban the trading of cosmetic items. Valve views this as a massive infringement on consumer rights. “Transferability is a right that we believe should not be taken away, and we refuse to do so,” the company clarifies.
After all, anyone who owns a physical trading card should be free to resell it as they see fit.
Valve also rejects the prosecutor’s demand for stricter age and location controls. The publisher refuses to implement such checks for all Steam users worldwide just to prevent potential VPN access from New York.
Valve writes, “Reaching a deal with the prosecutor’s office would likely have been cheaper, but it would have caused massive harm to our players and developers and also stifled [Valve’s] own ability to innovate.”
Valve concludes with a dig at the district attorney’s office, which claimed in its lawsuit that games such as Counter-Strike promote gun violence in the real world. Valve dismisses this as an outdated prejudice against shooter games and points to numerous scientific studies that have shown that there is no link between media and real-world violence.
The New York courts must now address the gambling allegations and Valve’s counterarguments. It is still too early to predict a winner in the case. However, should Valve lose, far-reaching changes would likely be in store for Steam and the entire gaming market; for such a gambling ruling against loot boxes would likely set a precedent for the industry.
In a public statement on Steam’s support page, Valve states that it does not believe that the so-called mystery boxes violate New York State law. They also expressed disappointment over the escalation to court, even though Valve had done its utmost to educate the prosecutor’s office on the nature of virtual items and mystery boxes.Q
According to Valve’s statement, the company was first contacted by the prosecutor’s office in early 2023. They attempted to make it clear to the authorities that loot boxes are a common practice these days, “not only in video games, but also in real life.”
In its statement, the publisher refers to Pokémon or Magic cards, as well as Labubus, which operate on the same principle:
They all come in a sealed box; the customer does not know in advance what is contained in the package.
Since Valve’s loot boxes only contain cosmetic items, players who do not purchase the boxes are not at a disadvantage. Furthermore, no one is forced to open the boxes.
We do not cooperate with gambling sites
Valve also points to its strict stance against real-world gambling on third-party platforms that use in-game items from Valve games. According to the publisher, this is a clear violation of the Steam Terms of Service.
The makers of Steam have banned over a million accounts so far because users misused them for gambling, fraud, or theft. Valve has also implemented features such as trading restrictions to make life difficult for dubious third-party providers and gambling sites.Controversy: Community Marketplace
Valve is particularly vehement in its opposition to the prosecutor’s demand to completely ban the trading of cosmetic items. Valve views this as a massive infringement on consumer rights. “Transferability is a right that we believe should not be taken away, and we refuse to do so,” the company clarifies.
After all, anyone who owns a physical trading card should be free to resell it as they see fit.
Valve also rejects the prosecutor’s demand for stricter age and location controls. The publisher refuses to implement such checks for all Steam users worldwide just to prevent potential VPN access from New York.
Valve writes, “Reaching a deal with the prosecutor’s office would likely have been cheaper, but it would have caused massive harm to our players and developers and also stifled [Valve’s] own ability to innovate.”
Valve concludes with a dig at the district attorney’s office, which claimed in its lawsuit that games such as Counter-Strike promote gun violence in the real world. Valve dismisses this as an outdated prejudice against shooter games and points to numerous scientific studies that have shown that there is no link between media and real-world violence.
The New York courts must now address the gambling allegations and Valve’s counterarguments. It is still too early to predict a winner in the case. However, should Valve lose, far-reaching changes would likely be in store for Steam and the entire gaming market; for such a gambling ruling against loot boxes would likely set a precedent for the industry.
Valve also points to its strict stance against real-world gambling on third-party platforms that use in-game items from Valve games. According to the publisher, this is
a clear violation of the Steam Terms of Service.
The makers of Steam have banned over a million accounts so far because users misused them for gambling, fraud, or theft. Valve has also implemented features such as trading restrictions to make life difficult for dubious third-party providers and gambling sites.Controversy: Community Marketplace
Valve is particularly vehement in its opposition to the prosecutor’s demand to completely ban the trading of cosmetic items. Valve views this as a massive infringement on consumer rights. “Transferability is a right that we believe should not be taken away, and we refuse to do so,” the company clarifies.
After all, anyone who owns a physical trading card should be free to resell it as they see fit.
Valve also rejects the prosecutor’s demand for stricter age and location controls. The publisher refuses to implement such checks for all Steam users worldwide just to prevent potential VPN access from New York.
Valve writes, “Reaching a deal with the prosecutor’s office would likely have been cheaper, but it would have caused massive harm to our players and developers and also stifled [Valve’s] own ability to innovate.”
Valve concludes with a dig at the district attorney’s office, which claimed in its lawsuit that games such as Counter-Strike promote gun violence in the real world. Valve dismisses this as an outdated prejudice against shooter games and points to numerous scientific studies that have shown that there is no link between media and real-world violence.
The New York courts must now address the gambling allegations and Valve’s counterarguments. It is still too early to predict a winner in the case. However, should Valve lose, far-reaching changes would likely be in store for Steam and the entire gaming market; for such a gambling ruling against loot boxes would likely set a precedent for the industry.
