Hodder explains that because ICE Poker is a peer-to-peer game, where there is no “house” that always wins, “the decentralized nature moves the legal issues away from the appearance of gambling.” And the focus on skill matters. “If the ability to win depends on chance or luck, it’s more likely to be considered gambling,” says Hodder, “whereas if the outcome depends entirely on the user’s skill and abilities as a player, it’s less likely to be considered as gambling.” (The counter-argument, I imagine, is that buying the wearable itself counts as a kind of “ante,” and the real gamble is that you’ll earn enough from the game to recoup the cost of the NFT. Then again, the extent of my legal background is watching “She Hulk.”)
