The Austrian Supreme Court has determined that FIFA loot boxes do not constitute gambling

The Supreme Court in Austria has concluded that the loot box mechanics in FIFA do not classify as gambling, attributing their decision to the element of skill involved.

According to a report by GamesMarkt, the Vienna-based high court determined that FIFA Ultimate Team’s mechanics don't meet the criteria for gambling. However, they acknowledged that the nature of loot boxes can sometimes equate to gambling, dependent on the overall context within the game.

The court stated, "In this video game, despite the random distribution of digital content within the Packs, players can leverage their skills to influence outcomes, creating a rational expectation of success."

This lawsuit was initiated by a group of players, with financial backing from Austrian litigant funder Padronus, who collectively spent €20,000 on loot boxes in FIFA games as a point of contention against Electronic Arts and Sony.

Richard Eibl, managing director at Padronus, expressed skepticism about the ruling's legal soundness, indicating their intent to see if other judges might rule differently in related pending cases.

Padronus is pursuing additional lawsuits targeting EA and Sony concerning similar issues, awaiting subsequent Supreme Court decisions.

An EA representative conveyed to GamesIndustry.biz their satisfaction with the Austrian Supreme Court's decision, which affirms that EA SPORTS FC and the Ultimate Team do not constitute gambling. The spokesperson indicated that the ruling provides essential clarity for the industry and players in Austria.

Leon Xiao, a legal researcher, told GamesIndustry.biz that the decision might encourage Austrian lawmakers to consider tougher regulations if existing concerns about loot boxes persist, highlighting that current gambling laws were not designed to address such issues effectively.

Xiao suggested that although new laws might not be necessary, existing consumer protection and advertising regulations could offer guidance, but these are not being robustly enforced, allowing some companies to bypass them.

He noted a similar outcome in the Netherlands in 2022, owing to comparable gambling laws with Austria. He contrasted this with UK legislation, citing a recent case involving former Jagex developer Andrew Lakeman, where virtual in-game currency was deemed "property," which supports the enforcement of stricter measures against loot boxes offering transferable prizes.

This article was updated to include further comments from Electronic Arts.