why trust img

Why Trust Web3Bet

Our team of experts has independently reviewed and evaluated all the products and services featured on this page to ensure you receive accurate and reliable information

A federal judge in the Northern District of California on Dec. 10 denied a motion by Boris Said Jr., the alleged creator of the now-defunct RBLXWild site, seeking to dismiss key claims brought by parents whose children allegedly gambled using Robux, the in-game currency used on Roblox. The order frames the central issue as whether a website that enables users particularly children to gamble away Robux is operating games of chance in which players can win or lose a “thing of value”.

The court’s answer was unambiguous: yes. In the ruling, the judge reasoned that Robux must be treated as a “thing of value” for purposes of the case, comparing Robux to arcade tokens because users spend real money to obtain them and then exchange them for something they value gameplay. The order notes that Roblox users can purchase Robux in set quantities with dollars and that eligible developers can cash out Robux through Roblox’s Developer Exchange Program (with Roblox taking a cut), reinforcing the idea that Robux has real-world economic significance in this context.

Why the “Robux as currency” finding matters for online gambling claims

Said argued that Robux should not count as a legally relevant “thing of value” under California’s gambling provisions because, as alleged, the child plaintiffs could not convert Robux into real-world currency themselves. The court rejected that framing, explaining that value is not limited to direct cash convertibility for the individual user; what matters is that Robux are purchased with money and used to obtain something of value (access to gameplay), making them comparable to tokens people buy and spend in an arcade.

The judge also emphasized that RBLXWild allegedly offered casino-style games such as coin flips, blackjack, and plinko built around wagering Robux after linking a Roblox account, and the order states the site could exchange Robux for cash because it participated in Roblox’s developer cash-out program. The court added that the plaintiffs allege the site generated “up to five figures a day” in revenue before shutting down after the lawsuit was filed, underscoring the commercial scale alleged in the complaint and helping explain why the case is being treated as more than a harmless “virtual items” dispute.

The case continues as scrutiny grows over Roblox-linked “kid casino” ecosystems

By denying the motion to dismiss, the court allowed the parents’ claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law and related common-law theories to proceed against Said at this stage, meaning discovery and further litigation now remain on the table. The order also flags how hard it can be to interpret older gambling statutes in modern online settings, but concludes there is “no plausible interpretation” of “thing of value” that would exclude Robux in the circumstances described an approach that could influence how other courts evaluate virtual-currency wagering models aimed at young audiences.

The ruling lands amid broader attention on third-party websites that allegedly lure minors into gambling-like behavior using Roblox accounts and Robux balances. A 2024 Sky News investigation reported on several large “Robux casinos”, including RBLXWild, Bloxmoon, and BloxFlip, describing how these sites were accessible to young users and offered casino-style games funded by the platform’s virtual currency. The court’s decision doesn’t resolve the full merits of those reports, but it strengthens a key legal premise behind such lawsuits: that Robux can function as money-value for gambling analysis when real money is used to buy it and systems exist to turn it back into cash.

Source: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/boris-said-order.pdf