For those that really want to know more about this.

http://www.gaminglawmasters.com/juri...nceOct2004.htm

Snippet from link:
Canadian courts are likely to take a common sense approach when dealing with contests and games that are part of commercial promotional activities. The gaming provisions of the Criminal Code were mainly drafted to curb illegal gambling and protect against “loss”, not to burden modern commercial marketing activities. In most cases, the provision of a free entry alternative should satisfy the basic purpose of the statute in eliminating the factor of contestants being forced to make a purchase or otherwise pay consideration as a condition of entry.

The more closely a contest or game resembles classic “gambling” activity, for instance contests that use machinery resembling slot machines or video lottery terminals, the more care should be taken in ensuring that:

(1) “skill-testing questions” are applied in a stringent fashion, requiring prospective winners to answer sufficiently difficult mathematical questions in a controlled environment to ensure that they have answered the question unaided; and

(2) “free-entry alternatives” are provided that carefully adheres to the “equal dignity” principle, such that disparities in treatment between paying and non-paying entrants are minimized to the greatest extent possible.
Sounds like the essay was the 'easy' way to avoid legal overhead for the tournament.