Soucek
Yaniv De Ridder, et al. v. Roblox Corporation, et al.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
YANIV DE RIDDER, et al., Case No. 23-cv-04146-VC
Plaintiffs,
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT
v. SAID’S MOTION TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFFS’ UCL AND COMMON
ROBLOX CORPORATION, et al., LAW CLAIMS Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 246
The California Penal Code contains several provisions that prohibit operating a game of chance in which the player can win or lose a “thing of value.” These provisions were drafted a long time ago, and they are very difficult to understand. The question presented here is whether a website that enables people to gamble away their Robux—the virtual currency that kids spend to play games on the Roblox platform—is operating games of chance in which players can win or lose a thing of value. The answer is yes. Although the meaning of “thing of value” under the relevant provisions is more difficult to discern than it should be, Robux must be considered things of value because they are akin to arcade tokens. Roblox users spend money to purchase Robux, which, like tokens, can be used to acquire a desired product: gameplay. If you’re playing a game in an arcade and…