this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
52 points (96.4% liked)

PCGaming

6500 readers
1 users here now

Rule 0: Be civil

Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy

Rule #2: No advertisements

Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments

Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions

Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.

Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.

Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts

Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments

Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
CSFFlame@lemmy.world
52
Steam News - The Updated Steam Subscriber Agreement (store.steampowered.com)
submitted 1 month ago by inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world to c/pcgaming@lemmy.world
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Biggest thing is this:

We’ve eliminated the requirement that disputes be resolved by individual arbitration. As always, we encourage you to contact Steam Support when you have any issues, as that will nearly always be the best way to reach a solution. But if that doesn’t work, the updated SSA now provides that any disputes are to go forward in court instead of arbitration. We’ve also removed the class action waiver, as well as the cost and fee-shifting provisions, that were in prior versions of the SSA.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, shit. There goes Steam doing something totally reasonable again.

[–] zoostation@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

No, not really. Valve was sued and (ironically) the arbitrator decided against the validity of the forced arbitration and let the lawsuit happen. If they could still get away with forced arbitration, they wouldn't have made this change.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Well, shit. A court ruling that isn’t total garbage.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Source?

[–] zoostation@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Im not a lawyer but the only thing I can read there is that Valve were denied arbitration.

[–] zoostation@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Right, meaning that it's pointless and costly for them to have a terms of service that directs people to arbitration, hence this change to their terms of service.