Key Takeaways
- Valve Corporation is facing a major class action lawsuit in the United States and a collective action in the United Kingdom, both challenging Steam’s 30% revenue cut and alleged anticompetitive practices.
- The lawsuits claim Valve’s control over PC game distribution has suppressed competition and harmed both developers and consumers, potentially leading to significant financial and industry-wide consequences.
- The cases are ongoing, with class certification expanding the pool of affected parties, and outcomes may reshape digital game distribution and storefront practices globally.
Overview of the Steam Lawsuit
Valve Corporation, the company behind the Steam digital distribution platform, is at the center of a high-profile legal battle. The core issue is Steam’s standard 30% commission on game sales, which has been criticized by developers and consumer advocates as anticompetitive. The lawsuit, originally filed in 2021, has now been certified as a class action in the United States, meaning it could affect all developers who have sold games on Steam since 2017. In parallel, a collective action in the United Kingdom seeks compensation for UK gamers allegedly overcharged due to Valve’s practices.
These lawsuits allege that Valve has used its dominant market position to impose pricing restraints and suppress competition in the PC game distribution market. The outcomes could have far-reaching implications for Valve, game developers, and consumers worldwide.
The Legal Basis: Antitrust and Competition Law
United States: Antitrust Allegations
The main U.S. lawsuit accuses Valve of violating federal antitrust laws, specifically the Sherman Act. Plaintiffs argue that Valve’s 30% revenue cut, combined with contractual restrictions on developers, has created an unlawful monopoly in the PC game distribution market. According to the complaint, Valve requires developers to agree not to sell their games at lower prices on competing platforms, a practice known as “most favored nation” (MFN) clauses. Plaintiffs claim this stifles competition and keeps prices artificially high.
Federal Judge John C. Coughenour allowed the case to proceed, ruling that the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged anticompetitive conduct (Bucher Law Firm). The class action now includes all persons or entities who have sold games on Steam since 2017 (PC Gamer).
United Kingdom: Collective Action
In the UK, Valve faces a collective action seeking £656 million (about $840 million) in damages. The claim, filed on behalf of UK consumers, alleges that Valve abused its market dominance to overcharge PC gamers. The action is being coordinated through the Steam You Owe Us campaign, which encourages eligible consumers to join the claim.
UK competition law, under the Competition Act 1998, prohibits abuse of a dominant market position. The claimants argue that Valve’s practices violate these rules by restricting competition and inflating prices for consumers.
Key Allegations Against Valve
1. 30% Revenue Cut
Valve’s standard practice is to take a 30% commission on all game sales through Steam. Plaintiffs argue this rate is excessive and only possible because of Valve’s dominant position in the market. Critics say this “platform tax” reduces profits for developers and limits their ability to offer lower prices to consumers (Rock Paper Shotgun).
2. Pricing Restraints and MFN Clauses
The lawsuit alleges that Valve requires developers to agree not to offer their games at lower prices on other platforms. These MFN clauses, according to the plaintiffs, prevent meaningful competition from emerging, as rival platforms cannot attract customers with better deals. This practice is central to the antitrust claims.
3. Market Dominance
Expert testimony, such as that from Dr. Steven Schwartz, has been presented to show Valve’s alleged dominance in the PC game distribution market (PYMNTS). Plaintiffs argue that Valve’s control over the market allows it to set terms that harm both developers and consumers.
Developments in the Case
Class Action Certification
The U.S. lawsuit’s certification as a class action is a significant development. It means that the case now represents a broad group of developers, not just the original plaintiffs. This increases the potential liability for Valve and raises the stakes for the entire industry (ClassAction.org).
Valve’s Response
Valve has denied all allegations of anticompetitive conduct. The company argues that its platform provides value to both developers and consumers, and that its commission rate is standard in the industry. Valve also points to competition from other platforms, such as Epic Games Store and GOG, as evidence that it does not have a monopoly.
Arbitration Clause Removal
In a notable move, Valve recently removed the mandatory arbitration clause from its Steam Subscriber Agreement. This change allows users to pursue disputes in court rather than being forced into private arbitration (Legal.io). This could make it easier for consumers and developers to bring legal claims against Valve in the future.
International Implications
The legal challenges against Valve are not limited to the United States. The UK collective action highlights the global reach of the case. If successful, the UK lawsuit could set a precedent for similar actions in other jurisdictions. The Steam You Owe Us campaign is actively seeking participants, and the outcome could lead to significant compensation for UK consumers.
Potential Impact on the Gaming Industry
For Developers
If the lawsuits succeed, Valve may be forced to change its business practices. This could include lowering its commission rate, removing MFN clauses, or allowing more flexibility in pricing. Such changes could benefit developers by increasing their share of revenue and enabling more competitive pricing.
For Consumers
Consumers could benefit from lower game prices and increased competition among digital storefronts. The lawsuits also raise the possibility of financial compensation for those who purchased games on Steam during the relevant periods.
For the Industry
The outcome of the Steam lawsuit could influence how other digital platforms operate. Similar legal actions have been brought against companies like Epic Games, and the results could reshape the digital distribution landscape (NC JOLT). The industry is watching closely to see how courts interpret antitrust and competition laws in the context of digital marketplaces.
Eligibility for Compensation
According to public information, both developers and consumers may be eligible for compensation if the lawsuits are successful. In the U.S., the class action includes all developers who sold games on Steam since 2017. In the UK, consumers who purchased PC games through Steam may be able to join the collective action (Steam You Owe Us). Details about how to claim compensation will depend on the outcome of the cases.
What Happens Next?
Both the U.S. and UK cases are ongoing. Legal proceedings can take years, and outcomes are uncertain. The courts will need to decide whether Valve’s practices violate antitrust or competition laws, and if so, what remedies are appropriate. Possible outcomes include financial damages, changes to Valve’s business practices, or both.
Conclusion
The Steam lawsuit is a landmark case in the digital gaming industry. It challenges the business model of one of the world’s largest digital platforms and raises important questions about competition, pricing, and consumer rights. As the cases progress, developers, consumers, and industry observers should monitor developments closely.
For attorneys and legal professionals seeking in-depth research and analysis, visit Counsel Stack for comprehensive legal resources.
Disclaimer:
This guide provides a general overview of the ongoing legal actions against Valve Corporation related to Steam. The cases discussed are active, and all information is based on current allegations and publicly available sources. Legal outcomes may change as proceedings continue. This is not legal advice. For specific legal questions, consult a qualified attorney.
