Minecraft, Valorant and Diablo Are Under Investigation

Investigation and Background

The EU’s Consumer Protection Cooperation Network (CPC) is investigating nine companies over in-game currencies. The games involved include Minecraft, Hunt: Showdown, Valorant, For Honor, and Diablo Immortal.

The effort follows a 2024 investigation into the Swedish game Star Stable Online. That investigation was prompted by a consumer complaint about marketing to children, time-limited offers, and unclear currency pricing.

Consumer-Protection Principles

After the investigation, regulators set out seven consumer-protection principles for games. They describe the principles as non-binding but say they reflect existing law. Industry representatives say they were not adequately consulted and have questioned the legal basis for the regulators’ interpretation.

The industry proposed measures such as:

• Providing spending histories.
• Displaying an estimated real-money price alongside virtual prices.
• Giving advance notice of content changes.
• Refunding unused currency purchased within 48 hours.
• Refunding purchases made by children without parental consent.

Regulators are seeking stricter requirements, including showing the highest possible real-money price, offering a clear currency top-up option, and allowing refunds within 14 days in some circumstances. Industry representatives argue that the proposed refund period lacks a legal basis and could allow people to use items before requesting refunds.

The Legal Status of In-Game Currency

The central dispute is whether in-game currencies qualify under EU law as a “digital representation of value”—and, in effect, whether they should be treated like money.

Regulators’ position could significantly change how games sell and manage virtual currency. The industry argues that currencies that cannot be cashed out are not money. It also points to an EU court ruling concerning the sale of RuneScape gold: because the gold could only be used in the game, it did not count as a digital asset like Bitcoin in that case.

Treating virtual currency as real money could create extensive obligations for publishers and players, potentially including financial contracts for transactions. The presenter says that scenarios such as players having to report game currency as taxable assets are extreme and unlikely, but illustrates how far the legal interpretation could reach. They also question whether repeated consent pop-ups would be practical.

Consumer Protection and Next Steps

The video distinguishes clearer pricing and protections against manipulative design from classifying virtual currency as money. Upcoming EU legislation, including the EU Kids Act and Digital Fairness Act, may address protections for children and “dark patterns”—design tactics that pressure or mislead consumers.

The presenter argues that directly tackling manipulative practices may be more useful than focusing solely on the legal status of currencies. They expect the core legal question may ultimately need to be settled in court.

The presenter concludes that both regulators and the industry have their own incentives, while players need better protection from dark patterns without an unnecessarily frustrating experience.

Presenter and Contributors

The presenter is a Bellular News contributor who is not named in the subtitles.