The Austrian Supreme Court has ruled that loot boxes in FIFA Ultimate Team, a popular game by Electronic Arts (EA), do not fall under Austria’s Gambling Act. This decision comes after a group of plaintiffs argued that the randomized digital packs offered by EA, which give players a chance to obtain rare footballers, amounted to illegal gambling. The court, however, disagreed, stating that the mechanics of the game do not meet the legal definition of gambling.
In its judgment, the court clarified that a game of chance is one where the outcome depends exclusively or predominantly on chance. Loot boxes do involve the random allocation of in-game items. However, the judges emphasized that players actively influence the overall game outcome through tactics, strategy, and controller skills. The plaintiffs were unable to prove that FIFA Ultimate Team relies predominantly on chance rather than player skill.
The ruling has come amid ongoing international debate over loot boxes. Critics argue that the mechanics mimic gambling, encourage compulsive spending, and foster pay-to-win dynamics. Parents and advocacy groups have expressed concerns about the widespread presence of loot boxes in games marketed to younger audiences. Several countries have introduced regulations to address these concerns. These include Belgium and, previously, Poland, both of which have imposed strict rules on loot box mechanics.
Other regions, such as the United Kingdom, have opted for self-regulation. However, reports suggest that many advertisements for loot boxes violate the industry’s own codes. Despite the controversy, loot boxes remain a highly profitable revenue stream for video game publishers. In 2024, EA earned $4.4 billion from extra content and live services. This represented nearly 60% of its $7.56 billion net revenue. Other major publishers, including Activision Blizzard, Tencent, and Riot Games, also generate significant income from loot box sales. This underscores the commercial importance of these digital mechanics.
The Austrian Supreme Court’s ruling sets a significant legal precedent. It contributes to the ongoing global discussion over the classification and regulation of loot boxes in video games.
