this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2026
81 points (96.6% liked)
PC Gaming
14935 readers
641 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My only guess is that it was dbrand’s attempt to strong-arm Valve into a skewed licensing agreement. Like “look at all these preorders we already have! We already have the design done, we’re already set up to produce them, and we’ll be ready to ship as soon as this contract is done. Just sign here to give us {extremely unfair share}.”
Basically, a way to say “we’re already way ahead of the game, just sign the contract and you won’t need to worry about trying to catch up.” But Valve obviously disagreed.
Video game IP theft for merch/skins/etc tends to be extremely rampant already. Tons of sites are full of merch with game characters and iconography that is definitely copyrighted, (oftentimes ripped pixel-for-pixel directly from the game) and definitely not officially licensed. And most tend to skirt along unnoticed. Small fish in a big pond, I suppose. But in this case, Dbrand intentionally made themselves known to the bigger fish. And it clearly didn’t work out for them.
Doesn't help dbrand's case that they tried to do the same thing with SONY with the PS5, IIRC. Not that I'm defending any of these 3 corpos.
Also dbrand's marketing schtick is being edgy gamers.