Steam Removed Forced Arbitration from Their Subscriber Agreement
store.steampowered.comLawyers are forming mass arbitration groups, costing companies thousands per arbitration case...
>For example, in the TurboTax case, a judge tallied (PDF) Intuit’s potential costs for the arbitrations to be at least $128 million—$3,200 for each of the 40,000 clients represented by Keller Lenkner, the firm behind the mass arbitration.
https://www.consumerreports.org/money/contracts-arbitration/...
So companies are removing the provision...
>Finally, companies may want to reconsider whether individual mandatory arbitration still represents the best dispute resolution system for their needs. Some companies already have opted to revert to court litigation and class actions, although the majority – even after having to face a mass arbitration – continue to use arbitration, albeit with several of the risk mitigation strategies described above.
https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2022/2022-06-30-how-comp...
Microsoft got around this in some of their agreements by adding provisions to "throttle" arbitration so that if a lot of customers file arbitration at once, they may have to wait months or years to have their case heard.
Binding Arbitration was already a blatant sidestepping of the American Constitution and general corporate accountability, but leave it to Microsoft, a monopolist with government contracts, to take it to another level. The only binding arbitration agreement I've seen which compared was Linode's, which included a gag clause.
I mean look at the shit Disney tried to pull recently saying a park guest couldn't sue after her husband died due to negligence on the parks behalf because they acknowledged D+ subscriber agreement that specified arbitration.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/14/business/disney-plus-wrongful...
They backed away from it but they tried.
Ahh I thought Valve had suddenly decided to do something consumer fiendly. Lol.
Suddenly?
- steam families
- removing the monopoly of windows gaming on PCs
- removing a ton of game piracy by making a platform people want to use
- progressing Linux desktop to be in a usable state
???
>- removing the monopoly of windows gaming on PCs
by becoming a monopoly? A lot of this ball started rolling because Wolfire accused Valve of price fixing. Pretty much the worst thing you can do.
And if you didn't read the ToS update: this is
1) RETROACTIVE application of this arbitration (remember when we got mad at companies trying to apply terms to the past)?
2) option out requires you to delete your Steam account. Holding your potential hundreds or thousands of dollars of games as hostage.
I don't think people realize how absurd this is.
>removing a ton of game piracy
Except when you need another third party account, then suddenly piracy is convinient again.
>progressing Linux desktop to be in a usable state
By relying on a windows environment, sure. I still yearn for native Linux gaming.
Sounds like embrace, extend, extinguish to me. Jk
A lot of people on Reddit's /r/SteamDeck report that this notice popped up while they were mid-game on Steam Deck. Often leading to (in-game) death.
Last night, I was playing Elden Ring, when suddenly the game screen froze, and then went black. The game's music was still playing in the background. I assumed that it was some sort of crash (notably, the first crash I have EVER experienced while playing that game on Steam Deck). After rebooting the Steam Deck, and finishing my play session, I noticed there was some sort of critical notification on my account, which turned out to be the update to the subscriber agreement. I assume that my game 'crash' was actually Steam attempting to show the agreement update over the game. Thanks, guys!
I can confirm that. I was playing OnceHuman and was mid-fight when a modal dialog from Steam just grabbed focus.
Same, middle of an Oxygen Not Included session- but on a regular PC.
I also find it interesting that I woke up to find california passing a bill declaring the use of "Buy" buttons for purchasing a content license on this site.
I find the arguments in this thread persuasive, but the timing and nature of valve announcing the change in terms more than a suspicious. I'd have to go check, but I would not be suprised if I received the notice around 5pm california time.
I was watching wulffden's stream last night and it popped up and got him killed in the game he was playing. Pretty nuts.
That arbitration rule is invalid in Europe, UK and Australia anyway.
Its one of those weird peculiarities present in US law which apply virtually nowhere else but show up in quite a few agreements across the world.
I wonder how valid the whole agreement is if it contains points which one can not possibly agree to.
I'm not a lawyer, but severability clauses are generally a thing when needed, both in contracts and in laws. As I understand it, courts are also reluctant to strike down an entire law or contract if the entire thing is not what is being challenged. Answering a question of law outside the bounds of the question the parties are asking the Court to answer is called an "advisory opinion," and illegal in many jurisdictions.
IAMNAL but there’s usually a clause to say that if some part of the agreement isn’t valid/can’t be enforced/etc then the rest of the agreement stands regardless. Who knows how well that stands up though (probably lawyers somewhere, but I doubt it is cited often).
Yep i looked it and that seems to be the case in german law.
Ther is actually some sort of way to resovle that called the blue pencil test.
I just got that email, "we have updated the Steam Subscriber Agreement".
It seems that the only way to not accept the new agreement is to close your Steam account. I assume they don't provide any way to use the games you bought if you do this, and don't refund you either. How is that legal?
Of course I've seen this in a ton of subscription-based services, but since Steam lets you "purchase" games, that really seems problematic?
> I assume they don't provide any way to use the games you bought if you do this, and don't refund you either. How is that legal?
Not really, no.
>Can I play games after deleting my account?
>During the 30 days before account deletion, games that require a VAC server will not be playable. After your account is deleted, games that require a Steam account will not be playable.
People calling Valve a "good monopoly" and then they turn around and hold your games hostage when lawsuits get too sweaty. This is exactly why GOG is my first choice where possible. And ironically the very kind of thing that Wolfire was worried about in their lawsuit.
Seems related to this: https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/column-mass-arbi...
This is rare, most other services tries to sneak in forced arbitration agreement
They lost a lawsuit as far as I can see: https://infosec.exchange/@SteamDB/113208423939527370 so they pretty much had to change it.
reading the comments there: got to love how anytime Steam comes up in a negative light that it turns into a "debate" on if a platform that controls 90% of its respective market is a monopoly.
It was still pretty annoying to be told I can't use my steam deck unless I agree to the update.
The update is in your favor. If it were the other way around you'd want to start a class action suit. (I am assuming you're not an arbitration lawyer that priced themselves out of the market)
I’m seeing this in everything. I was surprised to see it in a TP Link router for example. Avoid if you can.