Steam Lawsuit Collapses Over Wild Evidence

Valve Lawsuit COLLAPSES After Lawyers Use Steam Guide

#steam #valve #gaming

This video breaks down the sudden, critical danger facing the Consumer Antitrust Lawsuit against Valve. While the separate Publisher Lawsuit remains strong, the Consumer case, which alleges Valve's 30% commission is a supracompetitive "tax" on gamers, is now facing a Motion to Dismiss. This entire case is threatened by Valve's use of the Somers v. Apple precedent, which argues that the 30% fee was set before Steam achieved monopoly power. To counter this, Plaintiffs claimed Valve secured its early monopoly by acquiring the World Opponent Network (WON) in 2001. The crucial turning point is that Valve's lawyers exposed the Plaintiffs' core proof for the WON acquisition as unreliable "dubious internet sources." Specifically, Plaintiffs allegedly cited a fan-edited Sierra Wiki and a random Steam Community Guide as evidence against Valve's sworn declaration. We explain how this massive legal blunder—relying on user-generated content—could cause the judge to strike the key factual allegation, allowing the Somers precedent to apply, which would result in the dismissal of the entire consumer class action lawsuit. We analyze both sides of the economic argument, Valve's defense of its 30% cut, and what happens next as the court decides whether to end the case permanently.

0:00 A Tale of Two Lawsuits
0:59 Somers Trap
2:48 Footnote 8 Disaster
5:10 Overcharge Theory
6:58 Valve's Defense
8:16 What Happens Next

Citation: In re Valve Antitrust Litigation, 2:21-cv-00563, (W.D. Wash.) Document 560 & 552

Twitter   / watercs2