In a poker game, the house takes a cut from people exchanging money based on what cards they were dealt randomly by the house. Blizzard is taking a cut from people exchanged gear that was dropped randomly... its not that far off. Just because people are using an auction to place bids, doesn't change the facts that Blizzard is randomly doling out items with money values associated with them like a slot machine. It just that the payout is being filtered through an auction house to acquire it's market value.

It's not gambling, just like using eBay or Craigslist to buy/sell things is not gambling. It is an intermediary service to buy/sell in game items for real money. Since you are not gambling... it isn't gambling.

Then you could argue that getting an item itself is semi-random (since there are loot tables, you know what could drop off of a mob), but that doesn't extend to the auction houses themselves. Sellers choose the prices at which to sell their products and buyers choose whether or not to purchase those products.

Even if I gambled and won something in real life, my selling that item to a buyer wouldn't be considered gambling.

Yeah, it's online gambling (http://daeity.blogspot.com/2011/09/diablo-3-and-illegal-online-gambling.html) and everyone knows it. But the 'illegal' part won't be determined unless it goes to court.

From the linked article: "They redefined the definition of "gambling" as any and all games which involves the use of both chance and skill to win a prize "

The RMAH does not involve chance any more than ebay does. I'm not putting money on the 'chance' that UberWarriorZ is going to get a Mace of the Sorcerer. He already has it and is selling it to the highest bidder. Also, you aren't paying for the chance to 'win a prize' You're bidding on how much you'd be willing to pay to own it. If you don't bid the highest, then you don't pay, unlike a raffle (which was cited as an example in the article) in which you pay whether you win or not.

I'm sure Mat will correct me if I'm wrong, but an Auction house satisfies NEITHER of the redefined legal qualifications to be considered gambling.

The auction house itself would not be considered gambling. But *maybe* the auction house can make the game itself be - since you're paying money (game purchase and/or subscription fee) for a chance to get an in-game item worth real-world money. That's a pretty wide definition of gambling, but it's one that at least won't be laughed straight out of court. Whether it's enough to win a case, I don't know, but at least there IS a case.