Valve Corporation will face a £656m lawsuit in the UK over alleged unfair prices on its global online store, Steam, following a tribunal ruling that the case could continue.
The gaming giant is being accused of abusing its market dominance by imposing restrictive terms on game publishers and locking players into using Steam, the world’s largest distribution platform for PC gaming.
The legal action was brought by digital rights campaigner Vicki Shotbolt in 2024 on behalf of up to 14 million Steam users across the UK, who could be in line for compensation if she wins.
This is such a bizarre lawsuit. I had to pull up the actual filing to make sure I wasn’t missing something.
Specifically, the PCR contends that Valve has abused its dominant position by:
(a) imposing Platform Parity Obligations (“PPOs”) that prohibit publishers, which market PC Games, from selling Products through other distribution channels on better terms than the same Products are available on Steam
This is only true if you’re selling Steam product keys, which I feel just makes good sense. You’re still selling something that’s on Valve’s platform, so you need to adhere to Valve’s rules. You can offer a non-steam copy under any terms you like.
(b) restricting the ability of users to purchase Add-on Content for games purchased on Steam through other distribution channels (a ‘tying’ or ‘anti-steering’ infringement)
…is there any platform where this is not the case for paid content? I guess for anything that has additional content available on GoG this is technically true by virtue of it lacking DRM, but where else would you even buy it in that case? Is there some other DRM-free platform from which I can buy Blood and Wine and drop it into my GoG version of Witcher III?
(c) charging publishers unfair and excessive commission rates for distributing the Products (collectively the “Infringing Conduct”).
The question of whether Valve’s 30% is “fair” or not has been beaten to death already but it is funny to me how it was basically the industry standard right up until people started gunning for bigger pieces of the PC gaming pie and started undercutting Valve.
…is there any platform where this is not the case for paid content? I guess for anything that has additional content available on GoG this is technically true by virtue of it lacking DRM, but where else would you even buy it in that case? Is there some other DRM-free platform from which I can buy Blood and Wine and drop it into my GoG version of Witcher III?
I’d certainly love to see this precedent set and apply to literally every platform, but yeah, Valve’s doing nothing unique here. And changing the law around these things could require games to change the way they’re made…the only way it seems possible to me is if every version of the game is DRM-free, but that might have the side effect of encouraging games to only launch on one platform (and that one platform would be Steam, making this problem worse).
Every game version has third-party, kernel level DRM that locks the acquisition to your net ID, barring you from downloading it on any other device. Here, done :3
b is fair tbh, but then you would have to sue everyone
c also apply to other stores too like Google’s and Apple’s since they also have 30% fee (google play and apple’s app store are left untouched and also are probably worse because they locked down a little more from their systems…)
This is only true if you’re selling Steam product keys,
While Steam does claim that, there were two previous lawsuits in the USA saying otherwise, and I couldn’t find any other info online, nor how they ended up… and they also have that thing that if you are going to make a sales promotion on another platform you have to warn Steam so they can do it first… if in fact you can’t sell cheaper on a platform that charges you less, that’s top assholeness.
there were two previous lawsuits in the USA saying otherwise
Plaintiff claims aren’t always true. They’re financially incentivised to make claims that fit their narrative
I personally have a lot of issues with Valve and Steam. I’m not subscribed to the idea of our lord and savior Gaben. They get a lot of credit for just not beeing pure evil and atleast giving a bit of a shit about its consumers.
I really dont feel the need to defend an US based billion dollar monopolist. But the allegations are kinda bullshit? I can buy most of my games where ever i want. Epic, Ubi, Rockstar, EA, GOG, Itch, Fanatical, GMG, Humble, ZOOM, Prime, MS/XBOX and the List goes on and on and on. Nowhere can i buy crossplattform DLCs from my understanding. GOG has unique angle beeing drm free. In any other case i(!) atleast WANT to buy my games through Steam. Other plattforms and their launchers just suck ass. idk man.
"Valve “forces” game publishers to sign up to conditions which prevents them from selling their titles earlier or for less on rival platforms.
It claims that as Valve requires users to buy all additional content through Steam, if they’ve bought the initial game through the platform it is essentially “locking in” users to continue making purchases there.
This, Ms Shotbolt argues, has enabled Steam to charge an “excessive commission of up to 30%”, making UK consumers pay too much for purchasing PC games and add-on content."
"Valve “forces” game publishers to sign up to conditions which prevents them from selling their titles earlier or for less on rival platforms.
Complete horseshit. If they were preventing publishers from releasing earlier on other platforms, then how did all those timed exclusives on EGS exist.
And the bit about price parity only applies to Steam keys, aka, support and distribution is still being handled by Steam. Keys for GOG or EGS don’t apply
It claims that as Valve requires users to buy all additional content through Steam, if they’ve bought the initial game through the platform it is essentially “locking in” users to continue making purchases there.
Better sue MS, Sony, and Nintendo as well, then.
Yeah this is an easy one for Valve’s lawyers, what a waste of court time.
£656m
If GabeN loses, he might have to wait a month on that second yacht.
He’d need to sell 5 yachts first to be able to buy a “second” yacht.
Literally the last company that should be sued, why is gafam untouched?
