Little-known indie platform holder Valve have announced a new policy for Steam releases that make use of "AI" technolog…
    • rodbiren@midwest.socialEnglish
      221·
      10 months ago

      I do appreciate them at least sitting around and thinking for a second on what to do. The legal landscape on this is till murky. Steam could have opened themselves up to needing mass refunds or even possible payouts to copyright holders if the AI generation produces copyright content.

    • Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.worldEnglish
      124·
      10 months ago

      You can argue a monopoly only where there are both an active actual monopoly and when there are anti competitive practices in place.

      Steam doesn’t do anti competitive, their 30% cut is actually a deal when you consider how much you get in comparison to Epic or Gog, who both take 30% but both offer considerably less. Valve doesn’t push for exclusives the way Epic does and valve doesn’t do anything to make you not able to publish to other stores at all.

      Their edge is that they offer a better service for the same price.

      • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.worldEnglish
        28·
        10 months ago

        Forcing people to download their service for physical media isn’t anti-competitive? Or is that only when it’s Ubisoft or EA?

        • Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.worldEnglish
          71·
          10 months ago

          …that’s how DRM works yeah, and I’m guess you don’t actually know what anti competitive is because that’s not it buddy. You’re conflating two things that are very seperate topics. You can argue about it as it’s own thing, but that’s not anti competitive

          • conorab@lemmy.conorab.comEnglish
            31·
            10 months ago

            Not all content on Steam has DRM either so at worst you need an account and the client initially.

          • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.worldEnglish
            25·
            10 months ago

            Steam killed off brick and mortar stores for PC games. If that’s not anti-competitive then I don’t know what is.

                • Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  10 months ago

                  No? I just don’t think you actually understand what it means. You’re attaching ideas to something that doesn’t fit the ACTUAL definition. You don’t just get to change the definition of things and then say it’s someone else who doesn’t get it.

                  Being competitive is not the say as being anti competitive, lol.