[Paracompact]

Counterargument: Any "specific" wording of gambling would have condemned this activity. On average, vagueness in law generates more loopholes for corporate criminals to hide behind than it generates discretion for judges and juries to rule against them.

[daemin]

What is your stance on loot boxes in video games then? Is that akin to a poker/slot machine or is it more like a kinder surprise?

[Paracompact]

I wouldn't personally lose sleep on whichever way loot boxes were legislated. If their contents are easily converted into real-world cash, I would say the company bears some responsibility for the actions of any black markets, perhaps proportional to the volume traded. CS:GO has to crack down on its massive skins market, Kinder doesn't have to sweat its little toys.

Generally, I think the common-law notion of "consideration + chance + prize" augmented with the requirement of an "insurable interest" (in order to keep the insurance industry legal) discerns the truth well enough. Insisting that any "prize" not be monetary or monetarily-convertible keeps it from becoming a cyclical addiction, and evaluating infractions relative to volume keeps extremists from banning gumball machines and Kinder eggs.