• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Wolfire lawsuit agains Valve and Steam dominance of the PC market dismissed, Wolfire can submit complaint in next 30 days

dex3108

dex3108

Member
Oct 26, 2017
22,570
Madjoki said:
Valve's motion to dismiss was granted, but

"Wolfire may file a second amended complaint, addressing the infirmities described above, as well as any other changes it elects to make, within thirty (30)
days of this order."

So it may not be over yet.

Full doc:


The issues

Court wasn't convinced that Steam Store & Steam Platform are separate products

unknown.png


30% is not unfair, because everyone that took less than that failed

unknown.png

unknown.png


30% does not reduce number of games release, there has been more games released on Steam.

unknown.png


Wolfire didn't describe how review bombs harm consumers.

unknown.png



unknown.png
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well that went well.
 
Madjoki

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,230
Dark Catt vs. Valve seems to have same fate (Waiting for someone to purchase the document)
Judge for both cases are the same, so it makes sense.

unknown.png
 
PurpleMoustache

PurpleMoustache

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,580
napkins said:
it made zero sense from them to do this. what were they thinking at wolfire?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They did a bad job on messaging their case because iirc the core of it is they wanted to sell a DRM-Free, no Steam Key copy of their game on their site for less than what it was on steam for a sale, and Valve said no.

Which considering the sale would be happening outside of Steam, does not involve Steam or any of their services is messed up. The fact that this is part of the license agreement to sell on Steam was what is being contested here, but they instead tried to frame it as "if I can't do what I want on my own platform, why am I giving you 30%", because that was the byline for similar cases…
 

eathdemon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,626
PurpleMoustache said:
They did a bad job on messaging their case because iirc the core of it is they wanted to sell a DRM-Free, no Steam Key copy of their game on their site for less than what it was on steam for a sale, and Valve said no.

Which considering the sale would be happening outside of Steam, does not involve Steam or any of their services is messed up. The fact that this is part of the license agreement to sell on Steam was what is being contested here, but they instead tried to frame it as "if I can't do what I want on my own platform, why am I giving you 30%", because that was the byline for similar cases…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
but this is prity much the norm in most retail, prity sure wallmart has a similar deal.
 
ILikeFeet

ILikeFeet

DF Deet Master
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
61,987
PurpleMoustache said:
They did a bad job on messaging their case because iirc the core of it is they wanted to sell a DRM-Free, no Steam Key copy of their game on their site for less than what it was on steam for a sale, and Valve said no.

Which considering the sale would be happening outside of Steam, does not involve Steam or any of their services is messed up. The fact that this is part of the license agreement to sell on Steam was what is being contested here, but they instead tried to frame it as "if I can't do what I want on my own platform, why am I giving you 30%", because that was the byline for similar cases…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
if that was the issue, then they really botched this. at the same time, I kinda understand Valve's complaint that "why should I let you in my store if you're just gonna sell it cheaper elsewhere?" then...just sell it cheaper on your store?
 
Madjoki

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,230
PurpleMoustache said:
They did a bad job on messaging their case because iirc the core of it is they wanted to sell a DRM-Free, no Steam Key copy of their game on their site for less than what it was on steam for a sale, and Valve said no.

Which considering the sale would be happening outside of Steam, does not involve Steam or any of their services is messed up. The fact that this is part of the license agreement to sell on Steam was what is being contested here, but they instead tried to frame it as "if I can't do what I want on my own platform, why am I giving you 30%", because that was the byline for similar cases…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Even that is hard win.

Based on Valve's answer, it seems that anti-trust must hurt consumer, Valve asking for lower price isn't going to directly hurt consumer, quite opposite.
So they'd need to show something else, like 30% being too much.
 

eathdemon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,626
I mean its been normal pratice in retail for a maker of a product not to undercut their retail partners, you do that they stop selling your product. nothing about what valve did here is unreasonable.
 
Armaros

Armaros

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,901
eathdemon said:
I mean its been normal pratice in retail for a maker of a product not to undercut their retail partners, you do that they stop selling your product. nothing about what valve did here is unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

and wolfire's basic argument that 'not letting us overcharge Steam users is anti-trust' is real derpy and not going to anywhere with anti-trust law
 
OP
OP
dex3108

dex3108

Member
Oct 26, 2017
22,570
PurpleMoustache said:
They did a bad job on messaging their case because iirc the core of it is they wanted to sell a DRM-Free, no Steam Key copy of their game on their site for less than what it was on steam for a sale, and Valve said no.

Which considering the sale would be happening outside of Steam, does not involve Steam or any of their services is messed up. The fact that this is part of the license agreement to sell on Steam was what is being contested here, but they instead tried to frame it as "if I can't do what I want on my own platform, why am I giving you 30%", because that was the byline for similar cases…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They didn't do bad massaging, they tried to go with trickle down economics and blame Valve for higher prices by using Steam developer ToS. Issue with that is no matter how much benefits Valve it is still protecting customers who choose Steam as a platform from bad publisher behavior as much as that sounded strange. And on top of that Judge didn't see any evidence that other stores with lower cut can be sustainable, and similar thing happened at Epic vs. Apple case. It stuck up so much that Judge actually allowed Apple to collect % from sales done outside Apple ecosystem.
 
GrrImAFridge

GrrImAFridge

ONE THOUSAND DOLLARYDOOS
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,665
Western Australia
Delusibeta said:
I don't think that happened.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, there's nothing in the SDA about price parity, and I distinctly remember pre-ordering Mini Metro from the devs directly as the game was being sold at a lower price than what it would later launch at on Steam. I imagine price undercutting falls under the same umbrella as bundle key requests, where it might become a problem only if the number of activations are greatly outweighing Steam Store sales.

Edit: Pre-ordered it for USD$4 and it launched on Steam a few days later at USD$7.
 
Last edited:
Madjoki

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,230
Here's Dark Catt dismissal, they actually got bit further, because they didn't allege as much facts to goes against themselves.
Still wasn't enough to clear motion to dismiss bar, as mentioned above so they too got 30 days to file amended complaint.

Full doc: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/840584920261984257/911514631988719656/56.pdf

unknown.png


Valve has no duty to provide Steam keys

IKTOvs9.png


Court wasn't convinced that price parity clause exists

XHWpBlP.png


Court wasn't convinced that exclusivity clause exists or could be anti-competitive

bsNzLD1.png


Valve has valid business reason to require developers to provide updates to Steam customers

13QB79M.png
 
.exe

.exe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,214
Unsurprising turn of events in both cases. Most of their claims seemed pretty out there.

What's this about the elusive "most favored nations" clause in the SDA then? It doesn't exist? Even Sweeney tweeted about this at some point iirc.
 
Madjoki

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,230
Rosenkrantz said:
Why is it even a point in a lawsuit lol? I'll never understand why some devs want to have an access to all the perks Valve provides but think it's a great injustice if Valve regulates them in any way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Want to sell steam keys while not releasing game on Steam, ie. outsource all fees to Valve, but keep all the profits.
 
Tuco Benedicto Pacifico

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
8,466
Rosenkrantz said:
Why is it even a point in a lawsuit lol? I'll never understand why some devs want to have an access to all the perks Valve provides but think it's a great injustice if Valve regulates them in any way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The weird thing is that if anything as a company valve is pretty damn forgiving with its policies about keys sold on third party stores, dev websites, etc.

A lot of these "Tim Sweeney-ish" sentiments against the company, especially when coming from indie developers like in this case, often seem to boil down to "I want to benefit from your service, infrastructure and user base without recognizing to it any merit or value".
 
Rosenkrantz

Rosenkrantz

Member
Jan 17, 2018
4,917
Madjoki said:
Want to sell steam keys while not releasing game on Steam, ie. outsource all fees to Valve, but keep all the profits.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think any judge will grant someone's wish to use someone else's infrastructure without giving them anything in return.
Tuco Benedicto Pacifico said:
The weird thing is that if anything as a company valve is pretty damn forgiving with its policies about keys sold on third party stores, dev websites, etc.

A lot of these "Tim Sweeney-ish" sentiments against the company, especially when coming from indie developers like in this case, often seem to boil down to "I want to benefit from your service, infrastructure and user base without recognizing to it any merit or value".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah. Weirdest thing is IIRC Epic used Steam as a positive example of a market leader who allows for competition during the Apple trial. But I guess a lot of people bought into Sweeney's PR during the infancy of EGS when Valve was enemy number 1.
 
spineduke

spineduke

Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
8,745
Weird to go to court without even a shred of evidence - no emails, nothing. What exactly were they hoping for?
 
Madjoki

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,230
Tuco Benedicto Pacifico said:
The weird thing is that if anything as a company valve is pretty damn forgiving with its policies about keys sold on third party stores, dev websites, etc.

A lot of these "Tim Sweeney-ish" sentiments against the company, especially when coming from indie developers like in this case, often seem to boil down to "I want to benefit from your service, infrastructure and user base without recognizing to it any merit or value".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Valve bad because Humble Store temporarily run out of ARK Survival keys while on 90% discount, 8 months after it was free on Epic Games Store. Obviously Valve was retaliating due to being free on Epic and not giving keys due to that.

(Yes this is real argument from lawsuit)

Rosenkrantz said:
I don't think any judge will grant someone's wish to use someone else's infrastructure without giving them anything in return.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And they shouldn't be. This dismissal & Epic vs Apple trial are definitely good signs that judges won't be allowing it.

spineduke said:
Weird to go to court without even a shred of evidence - no emails, nothing. What exactly were they hoping for?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Probably to have something to overcome dismissal stage (where you don't need to just show that it's plausible, with any facts taken as true) and get to discovery and hope they can find some evidence from Valve's office's / computers.
 
GrrImAFridge

GrrImAFridge

ONE THOUSAND DOLLARYDOOS
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,665
Western Australia
.exe said:
Unsurprising turn of events in both cases. Most of their claims seemed pretty out there.

What's this about the elusive "most favored nations" clause in the SDA then? It doesn't exist? Even Sweeney tweeted about this at some point iirc.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It doesn't exist. Sweeney claimed in 2019 that he confirmed with unnamed devs that price parity is "expected", but there's no actual proof of this being the case (frankly, it's almost certainly a lie, as several months later, he falsely claimed Valve's policies on key generation were the reason why YsNet couldn't offer belated Steam keys to Shenmue 3 backers displeased with the EGS exclusivity deal), so I think Wolfire didn't actually do any research and just assumed he knew what he was talking about. Oops.
 
Last edited:
.exe

.exe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,214
GrrImAFridge said:
It doesn't exist. Sweeney claimed in 2019 that he confirmed with unnamed devs that price parity is "expected" but there's no actual proof of this being the case, so I think Wolfire didn't actually do any research and just assumed he knew what he was talking about. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Should call him in for expert testimony if they appeal this or w/e 🤡
 
LewieP

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
18,093
GrrImAFridge said:
It doesn't exist. Sweeney claimed in 2019 that he confirmed with unnamed devs that price parity is "expected", but there's no actual proof of this being the case (frankly, it's almost certainly a lie, as several months later, he falsely claimed Valve's policies on key generation were the reason why YsNet couldn't offer belated Steam keys to Shenmue 3 backers displeased with the EGS exclusivity deal), so I think Wolfire didn't actually do any research and just assumed he knew what he was talking about. Oops.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My understanding is that Valve would have happily provided Steam keys for Shenmue 3, but would have required the game to be listed on Steam for sale too. It was Epic that prevented this happening (by paying to have the Steam release postponed).
 
GrrImAFridge

GrrImAFridge

ONE THOUSAND DOLLARYDOOS
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,665
Western Australia
LewieP said:
My understanding is that Valve would have happily provided Steam keys for Shenmue 3, but would have required the game to be listed on Steam for sale too. It was Epic that prevented this happening (by paying to have the Steam release postponed).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sweeney asserted that was why YsNet couldn't give disgruntled backers the option of receiving a Steam key following the expiration of the exclusivity deal, but when people began pointing out that no such stipulation existed in the Steamworks documentation (which Sweeney must have forgotten was made public when Valve announced Steam Direct), hey-presto, a few days later, YsNet announced they'd have that choice after all. It was abundantly clear Epic didn't want the option on the table so it could secure the backers as users.
 
Last edited:
ramoisdead

ramoisdead

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,525
Their rebuttal sounds more batshit insane and delusional compared to their previous one.

Bunch of dummies.
 
Roshin

Roshin

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,840
Sweden
PurpleMoustache said:
They did a bad job on messaging their case because iirc the core of it is they wanted to sell a DRM-Free, no Steam Key copy of their game on their site for less than what it was on steam for a sale, and Valve said no.

Which considering the sale would be happening outside of Steam, does not involve Steam or any of their services is messed up. The fact that this is part of the license agreement to sell on Steam was what is being contested here, but they instead tried to frame it as "if I can't do what I want on my own platform, why am I giving you 30%", because that was the byline for similar cases…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is the part I don't get. If they want to sell it on their own, without any involvement from Steam, then why are they on Steam?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.