What's a shame is that you believe things that aren't true. If this really happened, it'd be all over gaming news. But it's not. Which leads me to believe you're either making this up or you are against Steam for whatever reason. If the ladder is true, I have only one question: why are you here then?

引用自 Leader of the Zakonistians：

What's a shame is that you believe things that aren't true. If this really happened, it'd be all over gaming news. But it's not. Which leads me to believe you're either making this up or you are against Steam for whatever reason. If the ladder is true, I have only one question: why are you here then?

Do you know how easy it is to pull up the BBC news website? They tend not to print willy nilly things based on rumours.

They, the BBC, unlike CNN or MSNBC or Fox "News:, when they print false stories, can be punished by our government here.

I posted a simple summary of the page and your attitude reeks of aggression.

引用自 Dura_Ace：

引用自 Leader of the Zakonistians：

What's a shame is that you believe things that aren't true. If this really happened, it'd be all over gaming news. But it's not. Which leads me to believe you're either making this up or you are against Steam for whatever reason. If the ladder is true, I have only one question: why are you here then?

Do you know how easy it is to pull up the BBC news website? They tend not to print willy nilly things based on rumours.

They, the BBC, unlike CNN or MSNBC or Fox "News:, when they print false stories, can be punished by our government here.

I posted a simple summary of the page and your attitude reeks of aggression.

Okay, fine, maybe that was aggressive but still, why isn't this headline news?

The article is real even if it does read like it was the result of an AI chat prompt: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpwwyj6v24xo

Not surprising, they like to file suit and hope they settle. MFN clauses which is what they are referring to are not illegal in any way. All it states is that you can't list your game for $500 on steam and then sell it for $20 on a keysite and use Steam to distribute your game since steam would get no cut of the sale.

Similar clauses are used by most stores that sell these.

引用自 Leader of the Zakonistians：

Okay, fine, maybe that was aggressive but still, why isn't this headline news?

Because its the equivalent lawsuit of ambulance chasers. Someone is trying the same suit in the US and its not going well. So its funny that they are trying it in the UK too. The company filing the suit has a rather sordid history of trying to extort big companies into settlements and has had numerous members of its law firm in the past be arrested and whom went to jail over criminal charges.

引用自 Dura_Ace：

Do you know how easy it is to pull up the BBC news website? They tend not to print willy nilly things based on rumours.

They, the BBC, unlike CNN or MSNBC or Fox "News:, when they print false stories, can be punished by our government here.

I posted a simple summary of the page and your attitude reeks of aggression.

Ahh the BBC the true honest face of media

1984: Falsified coverage of miners' strike
Main article: Battle of Orgreave
Footage of the so-called "Battle of Orgreave" on 18 June 1984 had been filmed by a crew from the BBC. When this appeared on that evening's BBC news bulletins, it was edited and broadcast out of chronological sequence, falsely showing pickets throwing stones at the police and the police subsequently carrying out a mounted charge.[42][43][44][45]

Fake child labour footage in Bangalore
The BBC's then nearly 60-year-old flagship weekly current affairs programme Panorama had aired a documentary claiming that Bangalore-based suppliers of Primark, a hugely successful retailer with 220 stores across Europe, were using child labour in their production in 2008. The claim has been found to be untrue and the BBC apologised to Primark admitting its mistake. Responding to Primark's protest, the BBC conceded in a 49-page report that footage of three boys engaged in completing garments for Primark was "more likely than not" to have been "not genuine" after a three-year internal inquiry.[151]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies

I am sure there is a truth in it all but lets be real for a minute Milberg London LLP and Vicki Shotbolt are not in this because they care about the user rights. They are there for the profits. Any British consumer that participates might get maybe 10 pounds back if even. While the legal corp and its financial backers will get tons or millions. Because that is what class action suits are these days easy profit for legal firms with very low expenditure because they will simply take on 5 or so cases they think they can win and if one succeeds they can afford losing the other 4

So yes they will push for settlement as Valve also knows they only care about the money so they throw in some bone (settlement) the dog (lawyer) is happy and the owner (consumer) is left behind with a chewed down bone to pick while the dog goes after the next fresh bone.

Worse then you think, the company suing has a rather sordid history of breaking the law which resulted in quite a few of their partners serving jail time. There was a big scandal with them a while back and its a very shady law firm.

引用自 brian9824：

Not surprising, they like to file suit and hope they settle. MFN clauses which is what they are referring to are not illegal in any way. All it states is that you can't list your game for $500 on steam and then sell it for $20 on a keysite and use Steam to distribute your game since steam would get no cut of the sale.

Similar clauses are used by most stores that sell these.

引用自 Leader of the Zakonistians：

Okay, fine, maybe that was aggressive but still, why isn't this headline news?

Because its the equivalent lawsuit of ambulance chasers. Someone is trying the same suit in the US and its not going well. So its funny that they are trying it in the UK too.

Price fixing is illegal in the UK. If the price parity clause prevents the publisher from having the game hosted on Epic Games at a permanent price point 5% lower than on Steam then it IS price fixing and Valve could be in trouble in the UK.

Just because something is legal in the USA it DOESN'T automatically follow that it is legal everywhere.

How do you spell Wolfire in UK English?

引用自 m662：

引用自 Dura_Ace：

Do you know how easy it is to pull up the BBC news website? They tend not to print willy nilly things based on rumours.

They, the BBC, unlike CNN or MSNBC or Fox "News:, when they print false stories, can be punished by our government here.

I posted a simple summary of the page and your attitude reeks of aggression.

Ahh the BBC the true honest face of media

1984: Falsified coverage of miners' strike
Main article: Battle of Orgreave
Footage of the so-called "Battle of Orgreave" on 18 June 1984 had been filmed by a crew from the BBC. When this appeared on that evening's BBC news bulletins, it was edited and broadcast out of chronological sequence, falsely showing pickets throwing stones at the police and the police subsequently carrying out a mounted charge.[42][43][44][45]

Fake child labour footage in Bangalore
The BBC's then nearly 60-year-old flagship weekly current affairs programme Panorama had aired a documentary claiming that Bangalore-based suppliers of Primark, a hugely successful retailer with 220 stores across Europe, were using child labour in their production in 2008. The claim has been found to be untrue and the BBC apologised to Primark admitting its mistake. Responding to Primark's protest, the BBC conceded in a 49-page report that footage of three boys engaged in completing garments for Primark was "more likely than not" to have been "not genuine" after a three-year internal inquiry.[151]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies

I am sure there is a truth in it all but lets be real for a minute Milberg London LLP and Vicki Shotbolt are not in this because they care about the user rights. They are there for the profits. Any British consumer that participates might get maybe 10 pounds back if even. While the legal corp and its financial backers will get tons or millions. Because that is what class action suits are these days easy profit for legal firms with very low expenditure because they will simply take on 5 or so cases they think they can win and if one succeeds they can afford losing the other 4

So yes they will push for settlement as Valve also knows they only care about the money so they throw in some bone (settlement) the dog (lawyer) is happy and the owner (consumer) is left behind with a chewed down bone to pick while the dog goes after the next fresh bone.

The plaintiff may not want to settle out of court. If they settle it will be without a legally binding decision on whether or not Steam's price parity clause amounts to price fixing (which is illegal in the UK).

引用自 Capt. Carrot：

引用自 brian9824：

Not surprising, they like to file suit and hope they settle. MFN clauses which is what they are referring to are not illegal in any way. All it states is that you can't list your game for $500 on steam and then sell it for $20 on a keysite and use Steam to distribute your game since steam would get no cut of the sale.

Similar clauses are used by most stores that sell these.




Because its the equivalent lawsuit of ambulance chasers. Someone is trying the same suit in the US and its not going well. So its funny that they are trying it in the UK too.

Price fixing is illegal in the UK. If the price parity clause prevents the publisher from having the game hosted on Epic Games at a permanent price point 5% lower than on Steam then it IS price fixing and Valve could be in trouble in the UK.

Just because something is legal in the USA it DOESN'T automatically follow that it is legal everywhere.

MFN clauses are legal in the EU as well. In fact even the EU government uses them in deals with other countries as well as between their nations. For instance the EU uses a MFN clause on many companies requiring them to offer the product at the same or comparable price between the various member nations.

A MFN clause is not price fixing. They are free to lower the price, they just have to give steam a comparable price, a term that is perfectly legal in business.

Feel free to read this paper on it - https://www.skadden.com/-/media/files/publications/2014/12/frese_2014_35_eclr_issue_12_print.pdf

You should really look into the company filing the lawsuit, they are about as dirty as you can get and many of the lawfirms members were arrested and disbarred for criminal acts in how they handled cases and their lawsuits.

引用自 Dura_Ace：

Butit also goes deeper as Steam is accused of using one sided agreements that prohibit sales of the game for cheaper on competing platforms. A so called "price parity" agreement. Which will be deemed to be illegal. Just because you sign up to a one sided EULA or a one sided legal agreement does not by far mean that this is legal.

Just being accused of something doesn't mean it's true. It is definitely true that there's a price parity required on sales of Steam Keys. For sales of games not in the form of Steam keys, the situation is murkier. There's nothing formally written down that says price parity is required, but there's an argument being made that Valve are enforcing it as an unwritten rule.

From the court docs from the similar US case, here's some people at Microsoft[storage.courtlistener.com] talking about this. One person says "[Price parity is] not formally listed in documentation in Steamworks, but always addressed in person", but another says in reply: "I thought we asked about most favored nation pricing way back when and the answer was no, it was not required."

So, like I said: murky.

I am pretty sure Valve will settle and attempt to steer terms. The loss in court could be catastrophic for Steam so my thoughts are that it will settle without admitting guilt.

They won't. As previously mentioned, there's a similar case[www.courtlistener.com] in a US federal court, and Valve are fighting it to the hilt. That case was probably the inspiration for this.

引用自 aiusepsi：

won't. As previously mentioned, there's a similar case[www.courtlistener.com] in a US federal court, and Valve are fighting it to the hilt. That case was probably the inspiration for this.

Yep, the company filing suit in the UK has a very bad reputation and was nearly disbanded after many of its members went to jail for illegal activities in a number of its cases. They basically harass companies, file lawsuits they don't expect to win, and then try to get them to settle out of court to avoid legal fees and make a profit off them

引用自 brian9824：

引用自 aiusepsi：

won't. As previously mentioned, there's a similar case[www.courtlistener.com] in a US federal court, and Valve are fighting it to the hilt. That case was probably the inspiration for this.

Yep, the company filing suit in the UK has a very bad reputation and was nearly disbanded after many of its members went to jail for illegal activities in a number of its cases. They basically harass companies, file lawsuits they don't expect to win, and then try to get them to settle out of court to avoid legal fees and make a profit off them

That's the sort of stuff which should result in more punishment, intentionally trying frivolous lawsuits hoping people just settle.

As someone from the UK. I disagree with this whole suit. I don’t feel ripped off by steam, I find steam quite generous actually. Especially compared to PlayStation & Xbox which are the ones who really do rip off UK consumers (globally probably)

I can also buy keys cheaper from many websites unlike both Xbox & PlayStation who don’t allow key distribution or heavily restrict it. This whole suit is pretty garbage