Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Sunday May 15 2022, @11:13PM   Printer-friendly
from the there's-a-steam-beat-and-it's-coming-after-you dept.

Judge brings dismissed Steam antitrust lawsuit back from the dead:

Last November, Western District of Washington Judge John Coughenour sided with Valve in dismissing a Steam antitrust lawsuit that had been filed by indie developer (and Humble Bundle creator) Wolfire Games. Now, that same judge is showing new respect for Wolfire's arguments, allowing parts of an amended version of the complaint to move forward.

In a May 6 ruling (noted by Bloomberg Law), Judge Coughenour said that the allegations in Wolfire's initial lawsuit were "anecdotal and threadbare" but that an amended lawsuit "provides additional context" and lays out a case that is "sufficient to plausibly allege unlawful conduct." As such, the judge has refused to dismiss large parts of that amended case, letting it move forward through the long judicial process.

In his original ruling, Judge Coughenour dismissed Wolfire's claims that Steam's 30 percent fee to publishers was higher than what the company would take in a more competitive market. At the time, the judge noted that Steam's fees had remained the same from its launch in 2003 through its alleged "market dominance" in 2013 and beyond.

In his new ruling, though, Judge Coughenour was receptive to the argument that Steam's fees relative to the competition have changed during that time, writing, "In those early days, Defendant was competing against brick-and-mortar game distributors, [but] the [amended complaint] makes it clear that Defendant did not need market power to charge a fee well above its cost structure because those brick-and-mortar competitors had a far higher cost structure."


Original Submission

Related Stories

“You a—Holes”: Court Docs Reveal Epic CEO's Anger at Steam's 30% Fees 15 comments

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2024/03/you-a-holes-court-docs-reveal-epic-ceos-anger-at-steams-30-fees/

Epic CEO Tim Sweeney has long been an outspoken opponent of what he sees as Valve's unreasonable platform fees for listing games on Steam, which start at 30 percent of the total sale price. Now, though, new emails from before the launch of the competing Epic Games Store in 2018 show just how angry Sweeney was with the "assholes" at companies like Valve and Apple for squeezing "the little guy" with what he saw as inflated fees.

The emails, which came out this week as part of Wolfire's price-fixing case against Valve (as noticed by the GameDiscoverCo newsletter), confront Valve managers directly for platform fees Sweeney says are "no longer justifiable."
[...]
The first mostly unredacted email chain from the court documents, from August 2017, starts with Valve co-founder Gabe Newell asking Sweeney if there is "anything we [are] doing to annoy you?" That query was likely prompted by Sweeney's public tweets at the time questioning "why Steam is still taking 30% of gross [when] MasterCard and Visa charge 2-5% per transaction, and CDN bandwidth is around $0.002/GB." Later in the same thread, he laments that "the internet was supposed to obsolete the rent-seeking software distribution middlemen, but here's Facebook, Google, Apple, Valve, etc."
[...]
The second email chain revealed in the lawsuit started in November 2018, with Sweeney offering Valve a heads-up on the impending launch of the Epic Games Store that would come just weeks later. While that move was focused on PC and Mac games, Sweeney quickly pivots to a discussion of Apple's total control over iOS, the subject at the time of a lawsuit whose technicalities were being considered by the Supreme Court.
[...]
In a follow-up email on December 3, just days before the Epic Games Store launch, Sweeney took Valve to task more directly for its policy of offering lower platform fees for the largest developers on Steam.
[...]
After being forwarded the message by Valve's Erik Johnson, Valve COO Scott Lynch simply offered up a sardonic "You mad bro?"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday May 16 2022, @09:13AM (4 children)

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 16 2022, @09:13AM (#1245270) Journal

    I'm not sure that I understand what is actually wrong here, If Valve/Steam charge a specific amount to publish a game, the the game producer agrees to it, then there is a contract. If the amount charged was exorbitant then he shouldn't have agreed to it. Crying about it later seems like an admission that they didn't do due diligence in the first place.

    • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday May 16 2022, @02:34PM

      by Freeman (732) on Monday May 16 2022, @02:34PM (#1245325) Journal

      'eh, it's possible it somewhat runs afoul of antitrust laws, but then so do the likes of Apple's App Store and Google's Marketplace. With the advent of the Steam Deck, Steam is somewhat similar to Apple/Google, but it's much easier to put Windows/Linux, etc. on the Steam Deck than it is to switch OS on a phone. Apple and Google should be slammed harder, if this lawsuit gains any traction whatsoever.

      --
      Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 16 2022, @04:04PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 16 2022, @04:04PM (#1245345)

      "I don't understand what is actually wrong here. If the mafia offers to provide protection for a business for a certain amount of money, and the business agrees, then there is a contract. If the amount charged was exorbitant, then it shouldn't have agreed."

      Obviously that's an exaggeration, but I think it illustrates that situations can be very complicated when fundamental assumptions are violated. As an example, it's very possible that Valve has a de facto monopoly and is abusing it (e.g. they are charging a lot more than anybody else). It's also very possible that everybody uses Steam because it's higher quality, and it's higher quality because Valve spends more to support it than anybody else.

      Regardless, it's at least plausible that there is a valid case here. Also, in thinking about the Apple iTunes store, my ignorant sympathies are more naturally in favor of the publisher over Valve, but that's entirely in ignorance.

    • (Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Tuesday May 17 2022, @01:07AM

      by wisnoskij (5149) <reversethis-{moc ... ksonsiwnohtanoj}> on Tuesday May 17 2022, @01:07AM (#1245516)

      It sort of sounds like they are saying that even though they did not have market dominance, they dominated with profit margins, and their non brick and mortar style made it like they were the only shark in the pond. AKA, they were so far ahead of the game, that even though they were technically a tiny fish in a big pond, no one could reasonably compete.

    • (Score: 2) by ledow on Tuesday May 17 2022, @07:53AM

      by ledow (5567) on Tuesday May 17 2022, @07:53AM (#1245578) Homepage

      Well, that's another reason to wean myself off Wolfire / Humble.

(1)