The out-of-the-box rise in the gaming industry in recent years has drawn strong attention from regulators. For example, the House of Lords Select Committee on Social and Economic Impact yesterday proposed that out-of-the-box gambling should be included as soon as possible. A previous study showed that the problem of throwing thousands of dollars out of the box has a considerable link with gambling psychology. The Children’s Commissioner’s report also suggests that if a product looks like gambling and actually feels the same as gambling, it should be considered gambling.
The House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee (DCMS) also said that the booty of video games should be seen as a form of prolifeback, recommending that higher authorities regulate them under the provisions of section 6 (6) of the Gambling Regulation Act 2005.
It would be too late to wait a few years for the product to cause material harm to children or adolescents if you think about using the Gambling Regulation Act to deal with it. And with regulatory escalation, it is clear that gaming companies will be pushing for new products that blur the line between the two.
In view of this, even if these games of probability cannot be included in the framework of legal definitions, the Committee recommends that regulators enact stricter laws from the perspective of protecting children and adolescents.
In fact, as early as last year, the DCMS Committee of the House of Commons expressed the same view. Unfortunately, for a long time to come, the Gambling Regulation Act remains at a loss to the game game industry.