Steam’s New EULA Prohibits Class-Action Lawsuits

Steam’s recent update had you agree to some new terms and conditions that you, in all likelihood, didn’t read. Included was a clause prohibiting class-action lawsuits, and Valve posted an announcement detailing the reason for this change.

In short, Steam’s new EULA stipulates that you can’t band together and sue Valve as a collective group, but that if you do sue them as an individual, they’ll reimburse your court fees. The announcement attempted to assure us that this was all done in the best interest of the community, and while Valve does have a trustworthy track record, being forced to sign paperwork that says, “Don’t gang up and sue us,” should at least raise some eyebrows.

My question is, how often has Valve been sued that they needed to do this?


via RPS

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

6 Comments on Steam’s New EULA Prohibits Class-Action Lawsuits

lol

On August 1, 2012 at 2:49 pm

They probably haven’t, but based on how needy and entitled this gaming generation is they are probably doing it to cover their asses.

Which is smart.

Ltenhet

On August 1, 2012 at 2:55 pm

IF something horrible does happen, which I doubt it will given STEAMs track record, where say… everyone lost their games or something and Valve refused to fix it (again, highly unlikely, just an example) I really doubt that this TOS would stop a Valid class-action lawsuit.

James

On August 1, 2012 at 3:17 pm

I doubt EULA can stop anyone from starting class action sue. Legal rights can not be signed away by any EULA. Local laws always trump that agreement.

Ron Whitaker

On August 2, 2012 at 6:36 am

In the past I would have agreed with you guys that the EULA can’t override local law. However, the reason that these clauses began to appear is that the Supreme Court ruled that they were valid. The case was called AT&T v. Concepcion. There some info on it here: http://gamepolitics.com/2011/04/28/atampt-v-concepcion-supreme-court-ruling-bad-news-future-class-actions

Derek

On August 2, 2012 at 11:20 am

The thing that bothers me is that if I DONT agree to it, I lose access to the service and ALL my already paid for games. I effectively have no choice in the matter if I plan to not surrender my ownership of those titles which is effectively what I am doing if I chose not to accept these new terms.

Am I entitled to compensation? Probably not.

Christopher

On August 14, 2012 at 7:32 pm

What if I don’t agree but I still want to play my game?