Nothing in this article constitutes legal advice. All opinions about legality are the author’s personal views only and may be incorrect or incomplete. Laws and enforcement priorities vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Publishers and creators assume all risk in applying this guidance. Always consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction before running any promotion.
Creators Are Still Running Sketchy Giveaways in 2025 — And Studios Are the Ones Who Get the Regulator Letters
The obvious “use my code to enter” raffles have mostly disappeared. They’ve been replaced by more subtle formats that can still raise serious regulatory red flags in the U.S. and EU.
The Problem Didn’t Go Away — It Just Got Sneakier
Many studios and publishers thought the worst giveaway compliance headaches were over once blatant referral raffles were shut down. Unfortunately, new formats have taken their place — often without the internal legal or community teams noticing.
These newer mechanics may contain the three classic elements regulators examine (prize + chance + consideration), or could potentially run afoul of EU unfair-commercial-practice rules, depending on jurisdiction and exact implementation. The difference is now subtle, often overlooked, and can carry serious consequences.
At the same time, regulators (especially in the U.S. and EU) are getting better at spotting these patterns, sometimes with automated tools. This article highlights formats the author has personally observed still being used in 2025 and shares safer alternatives.
1. Threshold/Milestone-Unlock Giveaways
Example: “When we hit 250 sign-ups with my link, I’ll unlock a big prize for a random winner!”
In some jurisdictions this format has been argued to include consideration (the referrals needed to unlock the prize). Whether it could be treated as an illegal lottery depends heavily on exact wording and local law; this discussion does not constitute legal advice.
2. Watch-Time or Loyalty-Point Raffles
Examples: “Every 30 minutes watched = 1 entry” or “Top 10 viewers get extra tickets.”
Significant non-monetary effort (watching for hours, completing tasks, etc.) has been treated by some regulators as potential consideration when it improves odds and no true equal-odds free entry exists. Regulatory guidance can vary by jurisdiction and may change at any time.
3. Discord Boost / Paid Role Entry Promotions
“All server boosters are automatically entered to win!”
Because boosts involve real money (even if paid to Discord), several U.S. state guidelines have suggested paid advantages can be viewed as potential monetary consideration unless a robust free entry method with equal odds is clearly offered.
4. Heavily Skewed “Free Entry” Options
A single poorly advertised “!freeenter” command while paid actions give 50–100× entries has been challenged in past enforcement actions. Many authorities require the free method to be genuine, easy to find, and offer mathematically equal odds.
How Giveaway Formats Have Evolved (2022 → 2025) – Anecdotal Observation
| Format | 2022–2023 | 2025 (author’s anecdotal observation) | General Concern Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct referral raffles | Very common | Rare / mostly banned | Low |
| Threshold-unlock giveaways | Uncommon | Frequently seen | Medium–High |
| Watch-time / loyalty entries | Occasional | Very common on streams | Medium–High |
| Paid boost/sub entries | Common | Still frequent | High |
| Heavily skewed free entry | Emerging | Widespread | High |
Safer Options Many Studios Are Using in 2025
- Creator-funded giveaways — Creator buys the prize themselves → pure skill-based or no-consideration raffle.
- Official studio sweepstakes — Proper rules, bonding if required, and a clearly advertised, equal-odds free entry method.
- No-chance rewards — First 100 viewers, everyone who raids, etc. (no random draw).
Simple Publisher Policy Checklist (2025)
Useful Official Guidance (always read the originals)
Final Word
Most creators aren’t trying to break rules on purpose — they just copy what everyone else is doing. Unfortunately, when regulators investigate, they almost always contact the company that supplied the prizes, not the individual creator.
Getting ahead of this with clear internal guidelines protects everyone: the studio, the partners, and the community.
