Which jurisdictions have this regulation? I’m pretty sure there’s no such thing as a leading retailer having to implement a disadvantageous sales agreement for the sake of their competition.

OP needs to keep a dictionary in the shower.

Again, this is a standard retail clause that has existed long before Steam. It would apply no matter what combination of retailers they choose to sell at because they all have this. This is why digital games are sold at the same price as physical copies when they cost less to distribute: the brick and mortar retailers have this same clause.

There’s no good reason to treat this like a Steam-specific thing. Every retailer has such a clause, big or small. This entire idea is based on a frivolous class action suit that is not going anywhere because it’s launched on the shaky grounds of the belief that Steam exclusively uses the MFN clause and that they think a 30% cut is too much.

That’s a pretty standard retail agreement clause that’s been around for decades before digital distribution. It’s not unique to Steam at all, letalone them doing it uniquely.

This would be the comment I would write if I was promoted to respond like the most stereotypical reddit gamer possible.

The purity politics of… not aligning with those who significantly fund far right national political parties??

Except Mullvad put out that statement in question as a defense. Their response is enough to turn people off the company.

Because that’s not the comparison being made.

Meanwhile men who insist on cargo shorts and flip flops to go with ill-fitting graphic t-shirts complain that women don’t find them attractive and turn into incels.

So what exactly is happening when people wear these danger-pants? Apparently the voluminous fabric gets wrapped around itself, as well as the wearer’s ankles and feet, causing them to trip.

Surely that’s always going to be an issue with this kind of very baggy design? That’s what stylist Clare Chambers told the Metro. “The wider the leg, the more likely it is to get caught and wrapped around the opposite leg/foot causing the wearer to trip and fall,” she said.

They started adding ads all over that Google news feed when you swipe right from your homescreen last year, the one that’s built into the Pixel launcher.

You didn’t even open the link to realize it’s not an article huh

Tankie saying everyone else is sheeple while espousing conspiracy theory YouTube playlist as objective truth.

They did though by patterning with publishers. Forcing physical releases to go through Steam as DRM. Killing the physical pc gaming market.

Not only does this not describe forced retail exclusivity, it’s three different statements that are all false in their own ways. Distribution agreements aren’t exclusivity agreements, Steam only deals in digital copies not physical copies, DRM implementation is optional, and there are no stipulations barring publishers from making or distributing physical copies.

We’ve gone from one incorrect statement about Steam to five.

They also have their Non-Favoured-Nations clause, meaning a game can’t be sold for cheaper off Steam.

You mean the Most-Favoured Nations clause that five people filed a suit over, based on a a Tim Sweeney tweet from 2019? Not only was that suit silly, it doesn’t even make sense as this sort of clause is extremely common in retail and not at all unique to Steam or Valve compared to other storefronts.

Only as they geared up to sell their own consoles.

You also don’t seem to be fully aware of Valve’s contributions to Linux gaming.

Steam didn’t employ forced retail exclusivity.

You also don’t seem to be fully aware of Valve’s contributions to Linux gaming.

Oh yes, that’s good. Didn’t even think about that. I’m so used to seeing -rf that I didn’t even register what I was looking at for a second.

deleted by creator

Luckily it’s France, not Quebec. France is much more amenable to providing documentation in other languages.

deleted by creator

You had 30 seconds? So much for a quick wit.