Armed conflicts were always triggered by a potential profit that sides of a conflict wanted to gain. Once, it was traditionally understood loot. The 20th century and tragic experience of subsequent wars have brought far-reaching legal regulations of contemporary armed conflicts. As a result, not only international humanitarian law of armed conflicts was established and far-reaching consequences concerning restrictions on the possibility of conducting wars were introduced, but also the right of loot, which before constituted an immanent element of armed conflicts, was significantly limited. Traditional country’s right to gain unlimited profit from wars at the expense of occupied territories and the defeated was significantly limited, and in some cases was even subjectively limited, what particularly refers to cultural goods. What is more, soldiers were irretrievably deprived of rights to plunder and loot. However, all that did not undermine economic causes of wars, although this factor is no longer reduced to traditionally understood iure praedae. The contemporary right of loot has different content, and different entities benefit from it nowadays. It is the consequence of a fact that not only states participate now in wars, but also other, non-state entities that treat a war as a lucrative business. It is as well associated with a problem of asymmetry of contemporary armed conflicts. Therefore, the term iure praedae, which comes from Grotius, needs to be redefined.