The video game industry has witnessed a significant rise in the utilization of loot box mechanics as a primary monetization strategy.  These mechanics have become a subject of intense debate, prompting discussions regarding fairness, ethical considerations, and even their compatibility with religious principles.  Prior to navigating these complexities, we must establish a foundational understanding of loot boxes and their core functionalities. At their core, loot boxes function as virtual containers within a video game that dispense randomized in-game rewards to players.

These rewards can be likened to a concealed treasure chest, where the contents remain unknown until the moment of acquisition. The spectrum of potential rewards encompasses purely cosmetic enhancements for a player’s character to strategically advantageous elements, such as powerful weapons or upgrades that demonstrably influence gameplay.

Two fundamental aspects define loot box mechanics:

• Randomized Rewards: The cornerstone of loot boxes lies in the element of chance. Players are entirely unaware of the specific reward they will receive upon opening a loot box, fostering a sense of anticipation that can be both stimulating and potentially frustrating.
• Acquisition Methods: While some video games incorporate loot boxes as earnable rewards through in-game progression, the more prevalent method involves purchasing them using either in-game currency (which can often be acquired with real-world money) or directly with real-world currency.

2. CONCERNS SURROUNDING LOOT BOX MECHANICS

Loot box mechanics have sparked concerns due to their perceived similarities with gambling activities and their potential to foster addictive behaviours, particularly among vulnerable populations. The randomized nature of loot box rewards, combined with the monetary investment required to obtain them, has drawn parallels to the mechanics of gambling, raising ethical questions about exploitation and potential harm. Furthermore, the unpredictable and compulsive pursuit of rare in-game items through loot box purchases mirrors the patterns of addictive gambling, prompting concerns about the normalization of such behaviours, especially in younger audiences. These two key issues have placed loot box mechanics under intense scrutiny from regulators, policymakers, and consumer advocacy groups worldwide.

a. Similarity to gambling

Loot box mechanics, while seemingly innocuous, have ignited significant concerns regarding their potential negative impacts on players, particularly those vulnerable to addictive behaviours. The inherent randomization and promise of valuable rewards embedded within loot boxes create a system that critics argue mirrors gambling mechanics. Players invest real-world money to participate in a randomized process where the rewards hold varying values. This system creates a situation akin to winning or losing, depending on whether they acquire a desirable or undesirable item.

The fundamental similarity lies in the element of chance combined with a monetary investment for a randomized outcome with variable rewards. This association with gambling raises significant ethical questions, especially in jurisdictions where gambling is prohibited due to its potential to cause social and financial harm.

Several high-profile cases have emerged where video games featuring loot box mechanics have been challenged in court.  For instance, the case of an Austrian Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS:GO) player who successfully sued developer Valve to recover EUR 14,096.58 (around USD 15,3k) spent on in-game weapon cases serves as a prime illustration of the ongoing legal debate surrounding loot boxes and their potential classification as a form of gambling.[1]

In that case, the court in Austria ruled that Valve, the developer of Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS:GO), must refund the aforementioned amount to a player who spent that amount on in-game weapon cases. The court found that these weapon cases constitute loot boxes and thus violate Austria’s gambling laws.  Weapon cases are a type of loot box that contain weapon skins, gloves, and knives.

Players can acquire them through random drops while playing the game, through trading with other players, or by purchasing them on various online marketplaces. The crux of the lawsuit centered around the random nature of the rewards in weapon cases. The plaintiff argued that since the contents of each case are determined by chance, opening them essentially constitutes gambling. The Austrian court agreed with this argument and ultimately ruled that Valve should reimburse the plaintiff for their in-game purchases. This case is significant because it highlights the growing legal scrutiny surrounding loot boxes and their potential classification as a form of gambling.

b. Potential for Addictive Behaviours

The unpredictable nature of loot box rewards raises significant concerns about the potential for players, particularly younger audiences, to develop problematic addictive behaviours akin to gambling addiction. Gaming Disorder (GD) was officially included in the ICD-11 as a group of disorders due to addictive behaviours.[1]  The cardinal symptoms of GD are impaired control over gaming behaviour, increased priority given to the behaviour, and its persistence or escalation despite negative consequences to the patient.[2]

There is a strong resemblance between obtaining rare items in loot boxes and taking a gamble. As players randomly obtain items from loot boxes, they become compelled to purchase more loot boxes in the expectation that they will eventually obtain a desired item, which is known as the variable ratio reinforcement schedule, a key factor in fostering addictive behaviours.[3]  Loot boxes are commonly purchased by many young people, and the less experience they have with such mechanism, the more challenging it can be for them to manage their impulsivity.[4]

3. DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO REGULATION IN SEVERAL JURISDICTIONS

The concerns surrounding loot box mechanics have spurred governments around the world to take action. This section will delve into the types of approaches taken by different countries in addressing loot boxes. Some have classified loot boxes as a form of gambling, others have mandated age restrictions and established transparency requirements through disclosure practices. Some have also addressed loot boxes indirectly through advertising regulations. Notably, these regulatory approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and jurisdictions that require probability disclosure could also have age restrictions on games with loot boxes, and so on.

a. Considered Gambling (Belgium and Austria)

Loot boxes have faced particularly strict regulations in Belgium and Austria, where they have been classified as a form of gambling. In Belgium, the Gaming Commission released a report in 2018 dedicated to loot boxes.[5]  Following an examination of loot boxes in four video games, the Commission concluded that three of them constituted games of chance subject to the country’s Gambling Act.

These games fulfilled the criteria of a game of chance, defined as involving a combination of being a game, involving a wager, involving chance, and resulting in a gain or loss.[1]  Since gambling activities in Belgium are restricted with exceptions outlined in the Gambling Act, the Commission deemed these loot boxes to be in violation.  The report also emphasized that even free loot boxes could be problematic if they incentivize players towards purchasing paid loot boxes.

To comply with the Gambling Act, the Commission mandated the removal of paid loot boxes from the offending video games.  Failure to comply could result in significant penalties for operators, including prison sentences of up to five years and hefty fines reaching EUR 800,000 for a first offense.  These penalties could be doubled for violations involving minors.  The Commission further clarified that prosecutions would primarily target game operators, with the possibility of extending them to those involved in running the illegal games.

Austria has also taken a firm stance against loot boxes.  In February 2023, a landmark court case saw an Austrian player successfully sue Sony for a refund on the money spent acquiring loot boxes in the FIFA video game series.[2]  The Hermagor District Court ruled in favour of the plaintiff, determining that the “Ultimate Team Player Packs” constituted illegal gambling.  This decision hinged on three key factors:

• Real-World Money: Players used real money to purchase the loot boxes.
• Randomized Content: The contents of the loot boxes were not predetermined.
• Financial Benefit: The acquired loot box items held a “financial benefit” because they could be traded between players on a secondary market, falling under the purview of Austrian gambling law.

While Sony had the right to appeal the judgment, they opted not to do so, solidifying the court’s decision.  This case was followed by another in August 2023, where both Electronic Arts and Sony were ordered to refund EUR 10,800 to a player after losing a separate loot box case in Austria. The actions taken by Belgium and Austria serve as a strong precedent for how loot boxes can be regulated as a form of gambling, with all the regulations that come with it.

b. Probability Disclosure (China and South Korea)

In contrast to countries that classify loot boxes as gambling, China and South Korea have adopted a different regulatory approach, focusing on probability disclosure. China was the pioneer in this area, implementing regulations in December 2016 that came into effect in May 2017.[1]  These regulations, which are still used in practice despite its abolishment, mandated that game developers disclose the probability of acquiring specific rewards through loot boxes.  These disclosures must encompass:

• The name and functionality of each item obtainable through loot boxes.
• The quantity and probability of obtaining each item.
• A prominent display of this information on the game’s official website or within the random selection interface itself.
• Transparency and accuracy in the published probability information.
• Retention of user participation data in random selection events for a minimum of 90 days to facilitate potential inquiries by relevant authorities.

Loot boxes that fail to comply with these regulations risk being deemed violations or even classified as gambling games, potentially leading to penalties and removal from online platforms.

Following China’s lead, South Korea also implemented its own loot box regulations in March 2023.[2]  Effective March 2024, these amendments require developers to disclose the probabilities of obtaining individual loot box items, as opposed to just categories of items.  This ensures a more granular level of transparency for players.  Technical requirements for displaying this information, along with other game product details like age ratings, are outlined in the corresponding presidential decree.

South Korea’s regulatory framework also incorporates an industry self-regulatory body, the Game Self-Governance Organization of Korea (GSOK).  Since February 2017, the GSOK has been actively advocating for and enforcing probability disclosures among game developers. The amended Act further empowers the relevant Minister to directly mandate companies to make disclosures or rectify misleading information.  Non-compliance with these regulations can result in penalties for failing to disclose loot box probabilities or disregarding corrective orders issued by the Minister.

By focusing on probability disclosure, China and South Korea aim to empower players with greater knowledge about loot box mechanics, effectively asking the players to acknowledge the risks and possibilities of the randomized reward system.

c. Minimum Age Rating (Germany and Australia)

Another approach to regulating loot boxes focuses on establishing minimum age ratings for games that incorporate them.  Germany has implemented regulations that utilize this strategy. In April 2021, amendments were made to the German Protection of Young Persons Act (JuSchG). These amendments came into effect in January 2023 and mandated the German age rating organization, the USK (Unterhaltungssoftware Selbstkontrolle), to consider the presence of “gambling-like mechanisms” when assigning age ratings to video games.[3]

Loot boxes fall under the purview of these “gambling-like mechanisms.”  In response, the USK also revised its internal policies in January 2023 to reflect this change.  As a result, games containing loot boxes now receive an age rating warning that translates to “In-Game Purchases + Random Items.”  This serves as a clear indicator to parents and guardians about the presence of loot box mechanics within the game.

Australia has taken a stricter stance on loot boxes through its amended Guidelines for the Classification of Computer Games 2023, which took effect in September 2024.  These guidelines mandate that video games featuring loot boxes must be classified at a minimum of M (not recommended for persons under 15 years of age).[1]  Furthermore, games that incorporate simulated gambling mechanics must be classified R 18+ (legally restricted to adults only).

The guidelines define “loot box” as a feature within a computer game where players can acquire digital containers containing randomized virtual items through some form of payment. Although this definition is somewhat limitative, it is a step in the right direction in regulation.  This age-rating approach in Germany and Australia aims to shield younger audiences from potential risks associated with loot boxes, particularly those related to addictive behaviours and the potential for irresponsible spending.

By implementing these minimum age ratings, these countries ensure that parents and guardians are informed about the presence of loot boxes before allowing younger players to access such games. This will open avenues for their involvement in the decision-making process regarding the suitability of the game content for their children. Not only that, these age ratings are intended to prevent misuse of in-game transactions that tend to occur in the younger audience.

d. Advertising Regulations (Indonesia and United Kingdom)

While some countries take a hard line on loot boxes themselves, others like Indonesia and the United Kingdom (UK) have taken a different approach by focusing on regulating the way loot boxes are advertised to consumers. Rather than directly regulating the games or loot box mechanics, these jurisdictions address loot boxes within the broader scope of consumer protection laws and advertising regulations.  This strategy aims to ensure transparency in the marketing and/or promotion of loot boxes while still allowing their inclusion in games. By regulating the advertising aspect, Indonesia and the UK seek to empower buyers with accurate information which will enable them to make fully-informed decisions when choosing to purchase loot boxes.

Indonesia’s Consumer Protection Law (Law No.8 of 1999) prohibits promoting products that “contain uncertain promises.”[1] Loot boxes, which are intangible objects utilized by consumers, are considered “goods” under  the Consumer Protection Law and as such are subject to its provisions.[2] The law prohibits business actors from offering, promoting, or advertising goods and/or services incorrectly, or as if offering something that contains uncertain promises.[3] Consequently, loot boxes may only be advertised as potentially containing certain items, but cannot be advertised as directly selling the contents themselves, as their acquisition is not guaranteed upon purchase of the loot box.

The law does not allow companies to promote loot boxes as offering a guaranteed outcome or mislead players about the random nature of the rewards. However, offering the loot box itself as a product as opposed to the contents of the loot box can still be done. Indonesia’s advertising regulations for loot boxes align with the UK’s approach overseen by the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP).

In September 2021, the CAP issued specific guidance on advertising in-game purchases, which includes loot boxes.[4]  These guidelines aim to prevent misleading advertising practices.  For instance, companies are prohibited from creating the impression that players have a much higher chance of acquiring rare items than is actually the case.  This includes practices like highlighting “near misses” where players seem to have narrowly missed obtaining a valuable item.  Additionally, the CAP discourages companies from falsely portraying limited-time offers for loot boxes, particularly if they intend to re-introduce those same offers later.  These regulations ensure that consumers are presented with accurate information about loot box mechanics and the associated element of chance.

4. CONCERNS REGARDING LOOT BOX MECHANICS IN ISLAMIC/SHARIA LAW

From the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence, the permissibility of loot box mechanics is a complex issue that requires a nuanced examination. This section delves into the Islamic legal concepts and principles that shape the discourse surrounding loot boxes. It analyses the concept of “Maisir” (gambling) and how loot boxes potentially align with the Quranic prohibitions on such activities. Additionally, it explores the notion of “Gharar” (excessive uncertainty) and its implications for the uncertain nature of loot box rewards. By unpacking these foundational concepts, this section aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the Islamic legal viewpoints on loot boxes and their potential classification as impermissible practices.

a. On Gambling (Maisir)

The permissibility of loot boxes under Islamic law (Sharia) remains an open question.  While there is no express conclusion as of yet, many Islamic scholars view loot boxes with a critical lens due to their inherent similarities to gambling, a practice explicitly prohibited in the Quran. The term “Maisir” in Islamic law refers to speculation or gambling.

This prohibition stems from the Quran’s edict that it brings more harm than good:

“They ask you about wine and gambling. Say: ‘In them both lies grave sin, though some benefit, to mankind. But their sin is more grave than their benefit.’”[1]

Sharia, however, recognizes the distinction between calculated business risks and pure gambling. The former is considered an acceptable part of commercial activities, while the latter is strictly forbidden.

The Quran serves as the foundational source of Islamic law, and its pronouncements are considered authoritative and indisputable.  One specific verse explicitly prohibits gambling:

“O you who believe! Intoxicants, gambling, idols, and (divination by) arrows are all evil of Satan’s handiwork. Eschew such (evil), that you may prosper.”[2]

This verse emphasizes the inherently detrimental nature of gambling and its association with negative consequences.

Applying these Islamic principles to video games, the inclusion of loot boxes raises ethical concerns.  Since loot boxes involve spending real money on a random chance of acquiring desirable in-game items as elaborated widely above, they share characteristics with gambling.  This element of chance and the potential for financial loss resonate with the Quranic prohibition on Maisir. Consequently, it could be argued that loot boxes could be classified as haram (forbidden) under Islamic law. While the Quran’s stance on gambling is clear, its application to the modern phenomenon of loot boxes is a complex issue.

There is no single, universally accepted interpretation among Islamic scholars.  Some may differentiate between loot box systems based on the level of chance involved and the potential for players to eventually acquire all items without relying solely on random purchases. The evolving nature of technology necessitates ongoing discussions within Islamic jurisprudence to address these contemporary situations. The uncertainty surrounding the permissibility of loot boxes under Islamic law presents a challenge for Muslim players and developers.  Understanding these religious perspectives can inform the design and consumption of video games within Islamic communities.

b. On Excessive Uncertainty (Gharar)

The concept of “Gharar,” literally meaning “risk” in Islamic law, plays a central role in the debate surrounding loot boxes. Gharar refers to situations where the characteristics, quantity, or even the very existence of what is being exchanged are unknown or highly uncertain. [1] This uncertainty can lead to unfair outcomes and a lack of informed consent, which consequently means transactions containing Gharar are forbidden.[2] By introducing elements of ambiguity, loot boxes challenge the principles of fairness and transparency in transactions emphasized in Islamic law.

Classic examples of Gharar from the Hadith (authoritative saying attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) include the prohibition of selling “fish in the water or birds in the sky” before they are caught, the amount or quality of which cannot be ascertained at the time of sale.[3] Loot boxes in video games introduce significant ambiguity and risk, as players spend money without knowing if they will receive a specific desired item. This scenario creates uncertainty, as the contents of loot boxes can vary widely in value; creating a disparity similar to the risks highlighted in traditional examples of Gharar.

Moreover, Gharar extends to situations where the outcome depends heavily on chance, with an unequal distribution of risk.[4] Similarly, loot boxes involve an element of speculation, as players spend money on the chance of acquiring a desirable item, but the risk of receiving something unwanted is substantial. This lack of control and the potential for wasted expenditure resonate with the prohibition of Gharar.

The lack of transparency in loot box mechanics further exacerbates the issue. Players often do not know the odds of obtaining specific items, and the true value of the virtual items is subjective and unclear. This opacity aligns with the principles of Gharar, as it involves a lack of information or misunderstanding between contracting parties. The high level of uncertainty in what a player is purchasing—spending money without knowing if they will receive a valuable item or something worthless—falls under the excessive uncertainty described by Gharar. This excessive uncertainty can lead to unfair outcomes and exploitation, where players may spend significant amounts of money without receiving commensurate value.

As things stand, it seems much more likely that loot boxes would be prohibited based on Gharar. Several factors contribute to this higher likelihood: the potential for addictive spending and financial loss on virtual items of unknown value raises concerns about exploitation, a core principle antithetical to Islamic commerce. Furthermore, the lack of transparency regarding loot box mechanics and item odds furthers the Gharar argument. Ultimately, the inherent uncertainty associated with loot boxes aligns with the classic examples of Gharar outlined in the Hadith, where one does not know what one is purchasing, resulting in excessive uncertainty.

5. CONCLUSION

The rise of loot box mechanics in video games has prompted a diverse array of regulatory responses across jurisdictions. Each lawmaker respectively addresses loot boxes through methods they deem most effective. Different approaches such as classifying loot boxes as a form of gambling, mandating the disclosure of loot box probabilities, implementing minimum age ratings for games featuring loot boxes, and regulating how loot boxes can be marketed have been implemented by different jurisdictions.

These varied approaches highlight the multifaceted challenges posed by loot box mechanics and the differing philosophical underpinnings guiding each jurisdiction’s response to this phenomenon. From an Islamic law perspective, loot boxes face scrutiny under the concepts of Maisir (gambling) and Gharar (excessive uncertainty).

The Quran explicitly prohibits gambling, and many scholars view loot boxes as potentially aligning with this prohibition due to their reliance on chance and monetary expenditure for randomized rewards. The principle of Gharar emphasizes transparency and fairness in transactions, which loot box mechanics may violate through their lack of clarity and uneven distribution of rewards. While no universal consensus exists, Islamic jurisprudence seems to lean towards prohibiting loot boxes based on their exploitative potential and intrinsic uncertainty antithetical to Islamic commercial ethics.

[1] Book 31, Hadith 1304,  Muwatta Malik

[2] Vol. 3, Book 12, Hadith 2195, Sunan Ibn Majah

[3] Vol. 3, Book 12, Hadith 1230,  Jami` at-Tirmidhi

[4] Book 11, Hadith 2854, Mishkat al-Masabih

[1] Quran 2:219

[2] Quran 5:90

[1] Article 9(1)(k), Law No.8 of 1999 on Consumer Protection

[2] Article (1) (4), Ibid

[3] Article (9)(1), Ibid

[4] Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) and Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP), ‘Guidance on Advertising In-Game Purchases’ (20 September 2021) <https://www.asa.org.uk/resource/guidance-on-advertising-in-game-purchases.html> accessed 15 May 2024

[1]Guidelines for the Classification of Computer Games 2023, p.15

[1] 2016 Ministry of Culture Notice on Regulating Online Game Operations and Strengthening Interim and Post-event Supervision Work

[2] 게임산업진흥에 관한 법률 [Games Industry Promotion Act] (as enacted as Law No. 7941 on 28 April 2006, effective 29 October 2006) and as later amended

[3] § 10b(3),German Protection of Young Persons Act (JuSchG)

[1] Article 2 (1), Federal Act of 7 May 1999 regarding games of chance, wagers and protection of the players

[2] Xiao, Leon Y. 2023. Loot Box State of Play 2023: Law, Regulation, Policy, and Enforcement Around the World, p. 15

[1] World Health Organization. Inclusion of “gaming disorder” in ICD‐11. 2018, https://www.who.int/news/item/14-09-2018-inclusion-of-gaming-disorder-in-icd-11, accessed 10 May 2024

[2] World Health Organization. 6C51 in ICD‐11. 2018, https://icd.who.int/browse/2024-01/mms/en#1448597234, accessed 10 May 2024

[3] Ferster CB, Skinner BF. Schedules of reinforcement. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton‐Century‐Crofts; 1957. p. vii 744–vii

[4] Inaguma T, Misumi S, Funatogawa T, Nemoto T, Harima H, Mizuno M. Does the loot box open the door to addiction? A case report of gaming disorder with high charges for loot box purchases. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Rep. 2024;3:e167. https://doi.org/10.1002/pcn5.167

[5] Belgische Kansspelcommissie (Belgian Gaming Commission), ‘Onderzoeksrapport loot boxen’ https://web.archive.org/web/20200414184710/https://www.gamingcommission.be/opencms/export/sites/default/jhksweb_nl/documents/onderzoeksrapport-loot-boxen-final-publicatie.pdf, accessed 12 May 2024

[1] Austria Press Agency. Press Release, https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20231218_OTS0033/counter-strike-lootboxen-erstmalig-fuer-illegal-erklaert-valve-corporation-verliert-spektakulaeren-gerichtsprozess, accessed 12 May 2024

Date: September 25, 2023

In a world where sports transcend borders and unite nations, multi-sport events have become a global spectacle. Multi-sport events are defined as organized sporting events, often held over multiple days, featuring competition in many different sports among organized teams of athletes from all over the world. From the illustrious Olympics to regional tournaments like the South East Asian Games (“SEA Games”), these events bring athletes and enthusiasts from around the world together to celebrate the spirit of competition. However, what many may not realize is that beyond the athletic achievements, these multi-sport events are governed by a complex web of regulations and international law agreements that bind participating countries. Furthermore, the landscape of multi-sport events has evolved, now even encompassing the realm of esports.

This perspective is based on the extensive experience of K-CASE Lawyer, which has been actively involved in Indonesia’s participation in three significant multi-sport events: the 14th IESF World Esports Championships held in Bali, the 2023 SEA Games hosted in Cambodia, and the 19th Asian Games in 2022, held in Hangzhou. KCASE’s involvement in these events has offered valuable insights into the intricate world of multi-sport gatherings, particularly with regard to the inclusion of esports as a prominent component. In this article, we delve into the fascinating world of regulations surrounding multi-sport events, including the international legal aspects and how countries agree to abide by them, all while highlighting the recent inclusion of esports in events such as the SEA Games and Asian Games.

The Backbone of Multi-Sport Events

Multi-sport events are not organized in a vacuum; they are governed by international sports organizations. Foremost among these is the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”), which holds responsibility for overseeing the Olympic Games—a pinnacle of athletic competition. In contrast, emerging organizations such as the Asian Electronic Sports Federation (“AESF”) have gained prominence, particularly in the context of esports. These organizations play vital roles in establishing the rules, standards, and guidelines that participating countries are obliged to adhere to. These encompass a wide array of aspects, ranging from athlete eligibility to doping control, venue requirements, and the rigorous process for selecting host cities.

International Law and Multi-Sport Events

When it comes to multi-sport events, the legal landscape is firmly rooted in international law, comprising several key elements that shape the way these global spectacles are organized and conducted. Two paramount aspects to consider in this context are the host nation agreements and the notion of sovereignty that participating countries grapple with. First, the applicable rules are pivotal in defining the legal obligations, financial commitments, and responsibilities of the countries hosting or attending the multi-sport event. Second, the sovereignty of nations participating in these events must be observed the same way it is observed in International Law. This section delves into these key elements and the intricate interplay between international law and the sovereignty of nations in the realm of multi-sport events.

The legal framework underpinning multi-sport events is anchored in international law. Several key elements come into play, which are:

1. Host Nation Agreements: When a country bids to host a multi-sport event, it enters into a host nation agreement with the relevant international sports organization. This agreement outlines the legal obligations, financial commitments, and responsibilities of the host country.
2. Olympic Charter, Esports Regulations, and Fundamental Principles: The Olympic Charter and specific regulations serve as constitutions for their respective events and set forth fundamental principles, such as non-discrimination, fair play, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Participating countries agree to abide by these principles.
3. Dispute Resolution Forums: International sports organizations have established mechanisms for resolving disputes that may arise during the events, including athlete grievances, and doping allegations, which must be adhered to in conflicts between countries. For example, the IOC mandates that any dispute having to do with the Olympic Games shall be submitted to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

Participating in multi-sport events is a voluntary act for countries, and they agree to be bound by the event’s regulations through certain means, which are:

1. Membership: These may differ in the case of different multi-sport events, but as an example, in the case of the Olympic Games, countries must have a National Olympic Committee (“NOC”) that has received recognition from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to qualify for participation in multi-sport events. Article 27 of the Olympic Charter, crafted by the IOC, establishes the roles and authorities of NOCs within their respective nations. Furthermore, it underscores the obligation of NOCs to guarantee the adherence of their country’s athletes and officials to the provisions of the Olympic Charter and the determinations made by the IOC.
2. Bid and Commitment: When a country decides to submit a bid to host a multi-sport event or confirms its participation, this marks the beginning of a formal commitment process. In practice, this often involves a rigorous selection and bidding process. Countries interested in hosting an event, such as the Olympic Games or FIFA World Cup, typically go through a competitive bidding process, where they present detailed proposals outlining their plans, facilities, and financial commitments. Through its bid, it tacitly agrees to abide by the event’s regulations governing it.

The Changing Landscape

One of the most remarkable developments in recent years is the inclusion of esports in multi-sport events. Esports, with its global popularity, has found its place alongside traditional sports in events like the SEA Games and the Asian Games. This inclusion marks a significant shift in the perception of competitive gaming and its recognition as a legitimate sporting endeavor.

Multi-sport events exemplify sports’ role in fostering international cooperation, requiring an understanding of key regulations and legal aspects. They unite nations in celebrating athletic excellence and upholding principles like fair play and inclusivity as defined in international law. The inclusion of esports highlights the evolving nature of these events, showcasing shared global values and aspirations that transcend tradition and time.

slot gacor

Date: August 18, 2023

In the ever-evolving landscape of esports, the pursuit of victory can sometimes blur the lines between fair play and manipulation. From the emergence of digital doping to the exploitation of game bugs and the unsettling realm of unsportsmanlike behavior, the integrity of competitive gaming is constantly put to the test. In this article, we delve into the distinctions between these contentious issues, highlighting their impact on the esports community and the measures taken to maintain a level playing field.

Digital Doping: Algorithms vs. Integrity

Digital doping, also known as “Robo-doping,” is a term that raises eyebrows within the esports realm. This practice involves the use of algorithms, software, and technological tools to gain an unfair advantage over opponents in virtual sports. This practice involves exploiting algorithms, software, and technological tools to gain an unfair advantage over opponents in virtual sports. While the concept of doping traditionally pertains to the use of prohibited substances or methods to enhance sporting performance, its extension into the digital realm has prompted a reevaluation of the regulatory framework.

One of the most notorious instances of digital doping involved Nikhil “Forsaken” Kumawat during the 2018 eXTREMESLAND Asia Finals in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS:GO). Using an “aimbot” cheat program, Kumawat could see through walls and automatically target adversaries, giving him an undue edge. His attempt to delete the cheat program and conceal his actions only led to more severe consequences. A five-year suspension from competitive play and a tournament ban followed, underscoring the gravity of digital doping’s impact on the credibility of esports competitions.

In accordance with the WADA Code, doping is defined as the presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers in an athlete’s sample, as well as the use or attempted use by an athlete of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method. Within the specific context of Indonesia’s esports scene, the Esports Federation of Indonesia (“PBESI”) Regulations defines doping as the use of prohibited substances or methods to improve sports performance. This definition aligns with the core principles of the WADA Code while catering to the nuances of esports competition. As demonstrated by the Forsaken case, the application of a prohibited program can result in severe consequences, similar to the use of prohibited substances in traditional sports. The convergence of traditional sports law principles and esports regulations underscores the necessity of a comprehensive approach to combating digital doping as is currently being done by the PBESI.

Bug Exploitation: Unintended Consequences

Bug exploitation is another ethical quagmire that has cast a shadow over the esports landscape. These exploits stem from glitches, vulnerabilities, or unintended features in a game’s code, granting players an unearned competitive advantage. The Valorant community witnessed an example of bug exploitation involving Cypher, a character with an ability called ‘Spycam.’ By manipulating the game’s mechanics, players could transform the remote camera into a makeshift turret, allowing them to eliminate opponents from a safe distance.

Drawing from our law firm’s extensive experience in esports events, it’s evident that esports competitions often employ meticulous technical handbooks. These guides, as demonstrated by events like the SEA Games, serve as comprehensive references for players, outlining the intricate rules, regulations, and protocols governing the event. Such meticulous documentation underscores the seriousness with which esports organizers approach fair play, ensuring that the events transpire on a level playing field.

In this light, the vital matter of preventing bug exploitation warrants significant attention. Organizers should proactively address potential vulnerabilities and unintended features in the game’s code, instituting measures to minimize the likelihood of exploitation. This entails a collaborative effort between game developers, tournament organizers, and players, all of whom share the collective responsibility of upholding the competitive integrity of the sport.

It’s crucial to note that in cases where bug exploitation does occur, the responsibility does not solely rest upon the players. Event organizers should assume a proactive role in preparing for such contingencies, thereby safeguarding the competition’s credibility. A comprehensive strategy that encompasses technical safeguards, player education, and immediate response mechanisms can mitigate the adverse impact of bug exploitation and maintain the event’s integrity. The game developers of competitive games that are considered esports should also ensure as much as possible that there are no bugs to be exploited. To this end, it is essential that there is a collaborative effort to handle this issue.

Unsportsmanlike Behavior: A Dark Stain on Esports

Beyond the confines of code and algorithms lies the realm of unsportsmanlike behavior. This umbrella term encompasses a wide array of actions, ranging from in-game taunting and verbal abuse to out-of-game violations such as intentional disruption of opponents’ gameplay. The esports community has witnessed instances where players exploit pauses or connection issues to gain tactical advantages, throwing sportsmanship to the wind in their pursuit of victory.

These two distinctions of violations are accounted for in Indonesia’s esports law. For in-game violations, the sanctions may depend on the referees overseeing the match, taking into account the specific context and severity of the offense. However, when addressing out-of-game violations of unsportsmanlike behavior, the following sanctions may come into play:

1. Light Reprimand: A formal warning issued to the offending player, reminding them of their responsibilities and urging them to adhere to ethical standards.
2. Severe Reprimand: A stronger form of reprimand indicating a more serious breach of conduct, often accompanied by an official acknowledgment of the offense.
3. Temporary Suspension/Dismissal Membership: A player found guilty of significant unsportsmanlike behavior may face a temporary suspension or, in extreme cases, be dismissed from participating in certain tournaments or the esports organization altogether.
4. Revocation of Professional Esports Athlete Status: A severe measure that may be taken in response to repeated or particularly egregious instances of unsportsmanlike conduct, leading to the loss of the individual’s professional athlete status.
5. Dismissal from PBESI Membership: PBESI membership may be revoked if a player consistently violates ethics codes, demonstrating a lack of commitment to the values upheld by the organization.
6. Fine: In addition to other sanctions, a monetary fine may be imposed on the offender as a form of penalty, aiming to deter future unsportsmanlike behavior.

This understanding of esports law is supported by K-CASE Partner Yudistira Adipratama S.H., LL.M., who is also the Head of Law and Legality at the PBESI and drafted the PBESI Regulations. This underscores the multifaceted approach needed to tackle unsportsmanlike behavior comprehensively. By implementing a range of sanctions tailored to the severity of the offense, esports organizations can promote a culture of accountability, integrity, and respect. Ultimately, this approach not only upholds the reputation of esports but also ensures a fair and enjoyable experience for players and spectators alike.

Upholding the Integrity of Esports

As esports continue to surge in popularity, maintaining a level playing field is paramount. Digital doping, bug exploitation, and unsportsmanlike behavior are challenges that the esports community must collectively address. Stricter regulations, transparent reporting mechanisms, and a commitment to education are essential tools to deter such actions and ensure fair competition. In Indonesia, efforts by the governing body for esports, the Esports Federation of Indonesia, are continually being made to regulate such behavior.

Esports thrive on the dedication and passion of players, teams, and fans. By actively confronting these issues head-on and fostering an environment of integrity and respect, the esports community can safeguard the future of this developing industry.

slot gacor

Tanggal: 25 Maret 2023

Game Esports menurut Peraturan Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PB ESI”) Nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Esports di Indonesia (“Peraturan PB ESI”) adalah game kompetitif yang telah diakui oleh PB ESI dan menjadi media pertandingan esports di Indonesia. Berdasarkan peraturan tersebut, suatu game dapat diakui sebagai game esports apabila game tersebut sudah diterima oleh masyarakat Indonesia secara luas dan memiliki sistem pertandingan kompetitif antarpemain atau antartim. Setelah game tersebut diakui sebagai Esports, barulah game tersebut dapat dimainkan dalam liga atau turnamen Esports yang diakui oleh PB ESI.

Berikut adalah tata cara pendaftaran game esports:

1. Persiapan Pendaftaran

Sebelum melakukan pendaftaran, penerbit game perlu menyiapkan dokumen-dokumen yang diperlukan dalam rangka pendaftaran game. Daftar dokumen yang diperlukan adalah sebagai berikut:

• Formulir pendaftaran game yang telah diisi. Formulir tersebut dapat ditemukan pada laman garudaku.com/licensing.
• Dokumen legalitas perusahaan dan portofolio

2. Menyerahkan formulir pendaftaran pada platform Garudaku

Formulir dan dokumen pendaftaran yang telah dilengkapi kemudian dikirimkan ke platform Garudaku sebagai official platform PB ESI.

3. Permohonan pendaftaran game oleh Garudaku kepada PB ESI

Setelah menerima formulir dan dokumen yang lengkap, Garudaku akan menyampaikan surat permohonan pemeriksaan dokumen hukum kepada PB ESI.

4. Keputusan pendaftaran game oleh PB ESI

Setelah menerima surat dan dokumen dari Garudaku, PB ESI akan melakukan legal due diligence terhadap dokumen dari penerbit game. Selanjutnya PB ESI akan mengeluarkan keputusan dalam bentuk surat jawaban mengenai penerimaan game atau permintaan kelengkapan dokumen.

5. Permohonan pendaftaran game esports

Apabila game telah berhasil terdaftar pada PB ESI, penerbit game dapat melanjutkan proses pendaftaran sebagai game esports sesuai dengan Pasal 39 Ayat (6) Peraturan PB ESI. Pendaftaran tersebut dilakukan melalui rekomendasi dari PB ESI atau melalui pengajuan permohonan dari penerbit game terdaftar untuk meningkatkan status game terdaftarnya sebagai game esports.

6. Keputusan pendaftaran game esports oleh PB ESI

Berdasarkan permohonan pendaftaran tersebut, PB ESI akan mengeluarkan surat keputusan yang menyatakan pengakuan atas terdaftarnya game sebagai game esports atau surat keputusan penolakan terhadap permohonan pendaftaran game sebagai game esports.

Tentang K-CASE Lawyer:

K-CASE Lawyer merupakan firma hukum pertama dan paling berpengaruh di Indonesia terhadap perkembangan hukum esports. K-CASE Lawyer dipimpin oleh Yudistira Adipratama S.H., LL.M. sebagai pemangku jabatan penting pada komunitas esports, yaitu sebagai Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Legalitas Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PB ESI”) dan Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Organisasi Asosiasi Video Game Indonesia (“AVGI”). Dengan jabatan pada komunitas esports tersebut, pendiri K-CASE Lawyer turut berkontribusi dalam pembuatan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan, Peraturan PB ESI nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Esports di Indonesia, serta yang saat ini sedang berjalan yaitu Peraturan Presiden tentang Program Percepatan Pengembangan Industri Game Indonesia. Pendiri K-CASE Lawyer selanjutnya yaitu, Valentino Revol Korompis S.H., M.Kn. Beliau merupakan mantan atlet esports pada game Counter Strike: Global Offensive, sehingga memiliki pemahaman yang mendalam terkait industri dan sistem kompetisi esports.

K-CASE Lawyer memiliki pengalaman yang luas di bidang esports dengan daftar klien yang berasal dari berbagai bidang dalam industri esports, baik game developer, event organizer, maupun tim esports profesional. K-CASE Lawyer telah berpengalaman memberikan pandangan hukum untuk kebutuhan klien seperti MPL, sebuah perusahaan startup Unicorn dibidang pengembangan gim dari India. Selain itu, K-CASE Lawyer juga turut memberikan konsultasi kepada tim esports profesional seperti BOOM Esports yang merupakan tim Indonesia pertama yang terkualifikasi dalam salah satu pertandingan yang paling bergengsi di dunia yaitu The International. Selanjutnya, Bigetron Esports yang telah memenangkan lebih dari 150 kejuaraan nasional dan 2 kejuaraan internasional PUBGM World Championship (PMCO) pada tahun 2019 dan PUBG Mobile World League: West di tahun 2020, dan EVOS Esports, salah satu organisasi esports terbesar di Asia Tenggara yang telah memenangkan Mobile Legends World Championship (M1) pada tahun 2019.

slot gacor

Tanggal: 21 Maret 2023

Industri esports Indonesia adalah industri esports yang paling cepat berkembang di kawasan Asia Tenggara. Terkait dengan hal tersebut, makin banyak juga turnamen esports yang akan diselenggarakan. Untuk mengatur aktivitas tersebut, Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PBESI”) telah mengeluarkan Peraturan PBESI Nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021, yang mengatur ketentuan tentang turnamen esports.

Salah satu ketentuan utama dalam regulasi tersebut adalah klasifikasi turnamen berdasarkan hadiah yang diberikan. Ada tiga klasifikasi turnamen: besar, menengah, dan kecil. Turnamen besar memiliki hadiah lebih dari 100 juta rupiah, turnamen menengah memiliki hadiah antara 15-100 juta rupiah, sementara turnamen kecil memiliki hadiah kurang dari 15 juta rupiah. Penting untuk dicatat bahwa hanya turnamen besar dan sedang yang wajib mendapatkan izin dan melibatkan PBESI.

Selain itu, Vendor penyelenggara turnamen esports juga diklasifikasikan menjadi tiga kelas: Kelas 1, Kelas 2, dan Kelas 3. Penyelenggara Kelas 1 memiliki hak untuk menyelenggarakan turnamen esports untuk semua kelas, Penyelenggara Kelas 2 memiliki hak untuk menyelenggarakan turnamen esports untuk kelas sedang dan kecil, sementara Penyelenggara Kelas 3 memiliki hak untuk menyelenggarakan turnamen esports untuk kelas kecil saja. Peraturan PBESI juga berfungsi untuk mencegah menurunnya standar penyelenggaraan Turnamen Esports di Indonesia, maka untuk menjadi penyelenggara Kelas 1 atau Kelas 2, Vendor harus mengajukan pendaftaran ke PBESI, membayar biaya pendaftaran, dan membayar biaya tahunan ke PBESI.

Salah satu ketentuan paling penting dalam regulasi adalah pernyataan bahwa turnamen esports berskala besar dan sedang yang diselenggarakan tanpa izin dan pengawasan PBESI adalah ilegal dan dapat dihentikan oleh PBESI. PBESI memiliki wewenang untuk bekerja sama dengan aparat penegak hukum dan pihak terkait untuk menghentikan turnamen esports yang ilegal. Ketentuan ini sangat penting untuk memastikan bahwa turnamen esports di Indonesia dilaksanakan secara adil dan diatur dengan baik.

Tentang K-CASE Lawyer:

K-CASE Lawyer merupakan firma hukum pertama dan paling berpengaruh di Indonesia terhadap perkembangan hukum esports. K-CASE Lawyer dipimpin oleh Yudistira Adipratama S.H., LL.M. sebagai pemangku jabatan penting pada komunitas esports, yaitu sebagai Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Legalitas Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PB ESI”) dan Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Organisasi Asosiasi Video Game Indonesia (“AVGI”). Dengan jabatan pada komunitas esports tersebut, pendiri K-CASE Lawyer turut berkontribusi dalam pembuatan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan, Peraturan PB ESI nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Esports di Indonesia, serta yang saat ini sedang berjalan yaitu Peraturan Presiden tentang Program Percepatan Pengembangan Industri Game Indonesia. Pendiri K-CASE Lawyer selanjutnya yaitu, Valentino Revol Korompis S.H., M.Kn. Beliau merupakan mantan atlet esports pada game Counter Strike: Global Offensive, sehingga memiliki pemahaman yang mendalam terkait industri dan sistem kompetisi esports.

K-CASE Lawyer memiliki pengalaman yang luas di bidang esports dengan daftar klien yang berasal dari berbagai bidang dalam industri esports, baik game developer, event organizer, maupun tim esports profesional. K-CASE Lawyer telah berpengalaman memberikan pandangan hukum untuk kebutuhan klien seperti MPL, sebuah perusahaan startup Unicorn dibidang pengembangan gim dari India. Selain itu, K-CASE Lawyer juga turut memberikan konsultasi kepada tim esports profesional seperti BOOM Esports yang merupakan tim Indonesia pertama yang terkualifikasi dalam salah satu pertandingan yang paling bergengsi di dunia yaitu The International. Selanjutnya, Bigetron Esports yang telah memenangkan lebih dari 150 kejuaraan nasional dan 2 kejuaraan internasional PUBGM World Championship (PMCO) pada tahun 2019 dan PUBG Mobile World League: West di tahun 2020, dan EVOS Esports, salah satu organisasi esports terbesar di Asia Tenggara yang telah memenangkan Mobile Legends World Championship (M1) pada tahun 2019.

slot gacor

PT Indospeak Swara Nusantara (“Indospeak”) recently provided expert interpreter services for several Government-to-Government (“G2G”) events between Australia and Indonesia, held in Sydney, Brisbane, and Canberra.

The events covered a range of important topics, from digital health cooperation to immigration and disability issues. Indospeak’s highly skilled interpreters worked tirelessly to ensure that all participants were able to communicate effectively and efficiently, despite the language barriers. Government officials from the directorate general level, including the Director General of Immigration from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, were in attendance at these events, as well as representatives from six different Indonesian ministries at the Sydney event.

Thanks to Indospeak‘s professionalism and expertise in interpreting services, the participants were able to discuss and exchange ideas on important topics related to Indonesia and Australia’s ongoing cooperation. These successful events have paved the way for further collaboration between the two countries, and Indospeak will go on to assist at bilateral and multilateral ministerial-level meetings in the coming weeks to further facilitate this cooperation.

We are proud to have supported our client in this important work, and we look forward to continuing to work with them in the future as they help bridge the gap between countries.

slot gacor

Tanggal: 16 Maret 2023

Esports merupakan fenomena yang semakin populer di Indonesia, yang memiliki banyak penggemar dan peserta dari segala usia dan latar belakang. Seiring dengan pertumbuhan industri esports, ada kebutuhan yang semakin meningkat untuk regulasi dan struktur yang akan memastikan bahwa tim esports beroperasi secara adil dan etis. Untuk mencapai tujuan ini, Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PBESI”) telah membuat Peraturan PBESI Nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021, yang diantara lain mengatur serangkaian persyaratan, hak, dan kewajiban untuk tim esports di Indonesia yang harus diikuti oleh tim amatir dan profesional dalam Bab V peraturan tersebut.

Ada dua jenis tim esports di Indonesia: amatir dan profesional. Kedua jenis tim harus membayar biaya keanggotaan kepada PBESI untuk dapat berpartisipasi dalam turnamen atau kompetisi yang diakui oleh PBESI. Tim profesional harus memenuhi persyaratan prestasi dan administratif tertentu agar dapat berpartisipasi dalam turnamen dan liga yang diakui oleh PBESI. Persyaratan prestasi mengacu pada ketentuan bahwa tim yang ingin bermain di Liga Esports 2 harus lolos dari Liga Esports Amatir, tim yang ingin bermain di Liga Esports 1 harus lolos dari Liga Esports 2, dan seterusnya. Hal ini memastikan bahwa tim berkompetisi di tingkat yang tepat dan bahwa kompetisi bersifat adil dan seimbang.

Persyaratan administratif untuk tim profesional sangat komprehensif dan mencakup berbagai hal. Pertama, tim profesional harus menjadi berbadan hukum dengan bentuk perseroan terbatas. Hal ini memastikan bahwa tim beroperasi secara sah dan transparan. Selain itu, tim harus memiliki Nomor Pokok Wajib Pajak (“NPWP”) dan melaporkan Surat Pemberitahuan Pajak Tahunan (“SPT Tahunan”), memiliki legalitas tempat tinggal dan usaha yang sesuai, dan memiliki fasilitas, akomodasi, dan Gaming House yang sesuai.

Tim profesional juga harus memiliki jadwal latihan dan mematuhi standar kesehatan pemain, yang meliputi lulus pemeriksaan medis rutin dan tes narkoba, termasuk namun tidak terbatas pada mariyuana, amfetamin, dan kokain. Tim harus memiliki kontrak dengan atlet profesional, logo, dan nama yang bebas dari elemen etnis, agama, ras, dan antargolongan (SARA) dan berbeda dari tim esports Indonesia lainnya. Selain itu, tim harus memiliki seragam khusus yang memiliki unsur pembeda dari tim esports Indonesia lainnya. Spesifik untuk tim profesional yang berkunjung harus mendapatkan Lisensi Kunjungan dari PBESI.

Di sisi lain, tim esports amatir tidak tunduk pada persyaratan administratif yang sama dengan tim profesional. Namun, mereka harus memiliki Buku Keanggotaan Digital yang mencakup semua data yang relevan dengan tim, seperti informasi atlet, informasi kontrak atlet, dan informasi serupa lainnya.

Terakhir, semua tim, baik amatir maupun profesional, harus terdiri dari setidaknya 60% atlet Indonesia dan menunjuk satu perwakilan tim untuk berkoordinasi dengan PBESI. Ketentuan atlet Indonesia ini diadakan untuk menjamin bahwa bakat Indonesia dapat dikembangkan dan diberikan kesempatan untuk bersaing pada level tertinggi, dan bahwa industri esports di Indonesia  bersifat berkelanjutan.

PBESI telah menetapkan serangkaian persyaratan, hak, dan kewajiban untuk tim esports di Indonesia untuk memastikan bahwa industri beroperasi secara adil dan jelas. Penting bagi semua tim esports di Indonesia untuk mengenal dan memastikan bahwa mereka mematuhi persyaratan ini agar dapat berpartisipasi dalam turnamen dan liga yang diakui oleh PBESI.

Tentang K-CASE Lawyer:

K-CASE Lawyer merupakan firma hukum pertama dan paling berpengaruh di Indonesia terhadap perkembangan hukum esports. K-CASE Lawyer dipimpin oleh Yudistira Adipratama S.H., LL.M. sebagai pemangku jabatan penting pada komunitas esports, yaitu sebagai Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Legalitas Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PB ESI”) dan Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Organisasi Asosiasi Video Game Indonesia (“AVGI”). Dengan jabatan pada komunitas esports tersebut, pendiri K-CASE Lawyer turut berkontribusi dalam pembuatan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan, Peraturan PB ESI nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Esports di Indonesia, serta yang saat ini sedang berjalan yaitu Peraturan Presiden tentang Program Percepatan Pengembangan Industri Game Indonesia. Pendiri K-CASE Lawyer selanjutnya yaitu, Valentino Revol Korompis S.H., M.Kn. Beliau merupakan mantan atlet esports pada game Counter Strike: Global Offensive, sehingga memiliki pemahaman yang mendalam terkait industri dan sistem kompetisi esports.

K-CASE Lawyer memiliki pengalaman yang luas di bidang esports dengan daftar klien yang berasal dari berbagai bidang dalam industri esports, baik game developer, event organizer, maupun tim esports profesional. K-CASE Lawyer telah berpengalaman memberikan pandangan hukum untuk kebutuhan klien seperti MPL, sebuah perusahaan startup Unicorn dibidang pengembangan gim dari India. Selain itu, K-CASE Lawyer juga turut memberikan konsultasi kepada tim esports profesional seperti BOOM Esports yang merupakan tim Indonesia pertama yang terkualifikasi dalam salah satu pertandingan yang paling bergengsi di dunia yaitu The International. Selanjutnya, Bigetron Esports yang telah memenangkan lebih dari 150 kejuaraan nasional dan 2 kejuaraan internasional PUBGM World Championship (PMCO) pada tahun 2019 dan PUBG Mobile World League: West di tahun 2020, dan EVOS Esports, salah satu organisasi esports terbesar di Asia Tenggara yang telah memenangkan Mobile Legends World Championship (M1) pada tahun 2019.

slot gacor

Tanggal: 14 Maret 2023

Berikut adalah beberapa pertanyaan yang sering diajukan kepada K-CASE Lawyer selaku firma hukum esports pertama di Indonesia mengenai hukum yang berlaku dalam ekosistem esports. Kami akan senantiasa membarui pertanyaan dan jawaban di laman ini berdasarkan pertanyaan-pertanyaan lain yang diajukan.

Apa itu K-CASE Lawyer?
Jawaban:
K-CASE Lawyer merupakan firma hukum pertama dan paling berpengaruh di Indonesia terhadap perkembangan hukum esports. K-CASE Lawyer dipimpin oleh Yudistira Adipratama S.H., LL.M. sebagai pemangku jabatan penting pada komunitas esports, yaitu sebagai Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Legalitas Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia (“PB ESI”) dan Ketua Bidang Hukum dan Organisasi Asosiasi Video Game Indonesia (“AVGI”). Dengan jabatan pada komunitas esports tersebut, pendiri K-CASE Lawyer turut berkontribusi dalam pembuatan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan, Peraturan PB ESI nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Esports di Indonesia, serta yang saat ini sedang berjalan yaitu Peraturan Presiden tentang Program Percepatan Pengembangan Industri Game Indonesia. Pendiri K-CASE Lawyer selanjutnya yaitu, Valentino Revol Korompis S.H., M.Kn. Beliau merupakan mantan atlet esports pada game Counter Strike: Global Offensive, sehingga memiliki pemahaman yang mendalam terkait industri dan sistem kompetisi esports.

K-CASE Lawyer memiliki pengalaman yang luas di bidang esports dengan daftar klien yang berasal dari berbagai bidang dalam industri esports, baik game developer, event organizer, maupun tim esports profesional. K-CASE Lawyer telah berpengalaman memberikan pandangan hukum untuk kebutuhan klien seperti MPL, sebuah perusahaan startup Unicorn dibidang pengembangan gim dari India. Selain itu, K-CASE Lawyer juga turut memberikan konsultasi kepada tim esports profesional seperti BOOM Esports yang merupakan tim Indonesia pertama yang terkualifikasi dalam salah satu pertandingan yang paling bergengsi di dunia yaitu The International. Selanjutnya, Bigetron Esports yang telah memenangkan lebih dari 150 kejuaraan nasional dan 2 kejuaraan internasional PUBGM World Championship (PMCO) pada tahun 2019 dan PUBG Mobile World League: West di tahun 2020, dan EVOS Esports, salah satu organisasi esports terbesar di Asia Tenggara yang telah memenangkan Mobile Legends World Championship (M1) pada tahun 2019.

Bagaimana hukum esports di Indonesia?
Jawaban:
Hukum yang mengatur esports di Indonesia dapat disimpulkan melihat dari nama esports sendiri yang mengandung kata sports, atau olahraga. Esports diatur dalam Undang-Undang Keolahragaan dan dianggap setara dengan olahraga prestasi lainnya. Esports juga memiliki Induk Organisasi Cabang Olahraga, yaitu Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia, yang memiliki wewenang menetapkan ketentuan pelaksanaan aktivitas esports sebagai olahraga prestasi di Indonesia.

Apakah yang dimaksud dengan esports?
Jawaban:
Secara legislatif, Pasal 1 ayat 1 Peraturan PBESI Nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Esports di Indonesia (“Peraturan PBESI”) mendefinisikan esports sebagai cabang olahraga prestasi dan profesional dengan mempertandingkan game yang diakui secara nasional oleh Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia. Kemudian berdasarkan Pasal 21 Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan, esports dapat juga dipahami sebagai olahraga yang berbasis teknologi digital/elektronik yang dipertandingkan dalam lingkup olahraga prestasi.

Apakah yang membedakan cabang olahraga Esports dengan cabang olahraga lain?
Jawaban:
Pertama adalah tentunya sifat unik esports sebagai olahraga berbasis teknologi digital/elektronik. Selain dari itu ada juga fakta bahwa esports terdiri dari beberapa game berbeda dengan genre-nya masing-masing seperti FPS dan MOBA, yang semuanya memiliki aspek-aspek unik. Hal yang paling membedakan antara esports dengan cabang olahraga lain, selain mengedepankan eye-hand coordination, adalah dalam esports terdapat berbagai jenis media pertandingan/gim dengan peraturan yang berbeda-beda. Lain halnya dengan olahraga seperti sepak bola atau panahan yang memiliki hanya satu peraturan dari tiap-tiap permainannya.

Apa itu Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia?
Jawaban:
Pengurus Besar Esports Indonesia, atau PB ESI, adalah Induk Organisasi Cabang Olahraga yang didirikan berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan. Induk Organisasi Cabang Olahraga didefinisikan dalam Pasal 1 Undang-Undang Olahraga sebagai Organisasi Olahraga yang membina, mengembangkan, dan mengoordinasikan satu cabang Olahraga, jenis Olahraga, atau gabungan organisasi cabang Olahraga dari satu jenis Olahraga yang merupakan anggota federasi cabang Olahraga internasional. Kemudian, berdasarkan Pasal 36 ayat (5) Undang-Undang Olahraga, PB ESI sebagai Induk Organisasi Cabang Olahraga esports mempunyai wewenang merumuskan dan menetapkan model pengelolaan, penyelenggaraan pembinaan, dan pengembangan esports.

Apakah anak di bawah umur bisa menjadi atlet esports? Apakah ada batasan minimum persyaratan usia untuk anak yang ingin menjadi atlet esports?
Jawaban:
Pasal 6 Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2022 tentang Keolahragaan menyatakan bahwa setiap warga negara mempunyai hak yang sama untuk meningkatkan prestasi dan mengikuti kejuaraan pada semua tingkatan. Pasal tersebut juga mencakup anak di bawah umur. Esports sebagai cabang olahraga yang berbasis teknologi digital memiliki banyak peminat yang berumur muda, dan tidak masalah untuk menjadi atlet esports selama tunduk pada peraturan yang berlaku. Berdasarkan Pasal 10 ayat (2) Peraturan PBESI, apabila anak tersebut berusia di bawah 18 (delapan belas) tahun, ia harus mendapatkan surat izin dari orang tua atau walinya dan kontrak kerja tersebut harus ditandatangani oleh orang tua atau walinya.

Apakah semua game di Indonesia harus terdaftar pada PB ESI agar dapat beroperasi?
Jawaban:
Tidak. PB ESI adalah induk organisasi cabang olahraga yang mengatur esports sebagai olahraga prestasi, dengan kata lain, game yang terdaftar di PB ESI hanya game yang akan dipertandingkan secara kompetitif sebagai olahraga prestasi dan telah terdaftar sebagai game esports di PB ESI.

Bagaimana syarat agar suatu game dapat terdaftar sebagai game esports di PB ESI?
Jawaban:
Berdasarkan Pasal 39 ayat (7) Peraturan PBESI Nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021, persyaratan agar dapat terdaftar sebagai game esports adalah sebagai berikut:
a. Bersifat kompetitif dalam bentuk antarpemain (player vs player) atau antartim (team vs team)
b. Diterima oleh masyarakat Indonesia secara luas.

Apakah Peraturan PB ESI hanya berlaku untuk anggota?
Jawaban:
Peraturan PB ESI tidak hanya berlaku untuk anggota, melainkan berlaku untuk semua aktivitas esports di Indonesia. Contoh dari hal ini dapat dilihat dari Pasal 16 Peraturan PB ESI, yang mengatur ketentuan turnamen esports. Pasal tersebut membedakan turnamen menjadi skala besar, menengah, dan kecil, dan menetapkan bahwa turnamen esports skala besar dan skala wajib mendapatkan izin dari PB ESI dan pengawasan dengan melibatkan anggota PBE SI dalam perencanaan dan pelaksanaannya. Untuk turnamen dengan skala tersebut yang tidak mendapatkan izin PB ESI dianggap ilegal dan dapat diberhentikan.

Apa itu Kartu Esports Indonesia?
Kartu Esports Indonesia (“KEI”) adalah kartu identitas yang dikeluarkan oleh PBESI dan diperuntukkan bagi Pemain, Pemain Amatir, atau Atlet Profesional untuk diakuinya seorang Pemain, Pemain Amatir, atau Atlet Profesional tersebut dalam daftar keanggotaan PBESI. Untuk detail lebih lanjut mengenai manfaat dan cara daftar KEI, dapat dilihat dari video ini.

Bagaimana ketentuan spesifik mengenai hal-hal lain dalam dunia esports?
Jawaban:
Berikut adalah beberapa artikel lain dari K-CASE Lawyer yang menjelaskan mengenai:
– Jenis dan Ketentuan Tim Esports Berdasarkan Peraturan PBESI Nomor 034/PB-ESI/B/VI/2021
– Pedoman Penyelenggaraan Turnamen Esports di Indonesia
– Tata Cara Pendaftaran Game Esports
– Hak dan Kewajiban Pemain Amatir dan Atlet Profesional dalam Esports
– Persyaratan dan Proses menjadi Atlet Profesional Indonesia dalam Esports

slot gacor

Pada edisi kali ini, penulisan difokuskan pada tiga topik utama yaitu mengenai perbedaan peranan, fungsi dan latar belakang hukum antar komite dan asosiasi, ketentuan poaching, serta ketentuan mengenai liga dan turnamen.

Pemahaman mengenai fungsi dan peranan antar komite dan asosiasi esports Indonesia sangat penting demi meluruskan persepsi tumpang tindih peranan yang selama ini hidup dalam ekosistem esports. Topik mengenai poaching dibahas demi menjawab pertanyaan masyarakat mengenai definisi dan batasannya. Kemudian pembahasan mengenai liga dan turnamen diangkat sehubungan dengan penyelenggaraan Pekan Olahraga Nasional (PON) esports yang sudah dekat.

This review presents the latest developments in legislation, regulation, and future imperative decisions affecting Indonesia’s esports ecosystem. Good reference to know the business model of an esports club as well.