This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
PRS claims "many game titles which incorporate PRS members' musical works are made available on Steam," including "high profile series" such as Forza Horizon, FIFA/EA FC, and GTA.
Insanity. It's like suing a grocery shop for selling the xyz branded milk for using their copyrighted font.
It’s like suing a grocery shop for selling the xyz branded milk for using their copyrighted font.
I came here to make this exact point.
The real reason they do it of course, is that Steam is big, and they can get more money from Steam if they win.
Juries are very unpredictable in such cases. And that's what they are playing on.
Juries are very unpredictable in such cases. And that’s what they are playing on.
This is in the UK, except in very rare exceptions, we don't have juries for civil matters.
Ok thanks, I assumed it was in USA, since Valve is American.
Also frivolous suits tend to happen most in USA.
Huh? The game studios pay the licenses, the artists etc. Why on earth would you then hold the store accountable? This is double dipping. That's like charging a CD store for selling your CDs.
This shit is why the music industry is despised.
Are they going to sue to operating system owners next? What about the web browser that offers the steam installer download?
why stop there! lets go after keyboard manufacturers for allowing people to type words.
Wait what? Why would valve need to license the music? They're not making the games...That should be the responsibility of the game studio or developer that makes the game that uses the music.
"The litigation will progress until Valve obeys" sounds an awful lot like extortion.
They are clearly trying to double/triple dip on shit that already been paid for and licensed.
Whats next?
Make us individual game owners pay license every time we download and install the game?
Lest we forget, Unity tried to do just that and walked back due to backlash.
I feel like by this logic Amazon and Walmart would also need to obtain lisences to sell video games that have music in them...
That or I'm too tired and bread dead to understand the stupid shit I just read.
There have been so many lawsuits against Valve recently from so many different angles. I'm not usually one for conspiracy but I wouldn't be shocked if this is a coordinated campaign to unseat Valve from their monopoly on the PC gaming market so that other games industry corporations can move in. They've been trying and failing to break into this market for years because Valve has built so much consumer loyalty.
If it isn't publicly traded, they can't take over it, enshitify it, and squeeze it until it's useless. So of course they hate it.
This kind of lawsuit only makes things worse for musicians who are already struggling with making money performing and recording. This will be challenged, beaten and leave a bad image for artists as not everyone is going to draw logical conclusions from it.
It’s not about artists anyway despite their claim, it’s about labels. The artists doing well are doing their own thing recording, touring, selling merchandise and making sure their followers are getting value for money. The traditional labels are losing control the same way the magazines did.
The price might not be worth it, but would be really funny if Valve just delisted the claimed games in the UK and notified the publishers that they need to remove the claimed music or resolve the licensing issue if they want their game back up. Instead of one tidy lawsuit, suddenly these guys are being contacted by the angry lawyers of hundreds of orgs they have existing contracts with.
Shouldn't they be suing the game publishers not the reseller?
So EA and Microsoft according to their docket?
No because they have a license to use the music already. They are seeking the equivalent of performance rights from Steam. They are extortionists.
Yes we’ve had first rights payments, but what about seconds rights payments??
Isn't this kind of like suing blockbuster over music in the films they rent? Seems a bit daft, but there must be a reason they think it might succeed.
It seems similar to the idea that you could sue Google for copyright infringement because it serves a website that infringes copyright. Like… valve just serves the content and facilitates sale, right? The act of infringement wasn’t committed by them, it was committed by the game developers. Am I mistaken?
From what I understand, the music was used under licence by the game developers. The plaintiffs want Steam to also pay them for a licence to offer the game, which is already legally using the music, on their store, which is absurd.
Meanwhile, big AI vacuums up the entirety of music produced by everyone from piracy sites for profit and noone bats an eye
But the game publishers already had licence, and if they didn't have a licence then their beef is with the publishers not the storefront.
Anyway I've bought GTA V from physical brick and mortar stores in the past, so are they going to start suing the brick and mortar stores as well?
Hopefully they lose this case because copyright law is an absolute joke. It hasn't been fit for purpose for about 20 years.
Next in convenience store owners and employees need to get a music license for selling CDs and DVDs so the public.
Apparently PRS already took it to another level by threatening an employee for singing to herself at the store she worked at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/tayside_and_central/8317952.stm
See, this is why I fucking hate copyright law. It’s so fucked and even though this is clearly fucking bogus, watch them find some kind of loophole and set a precedent
Information should be free. It is as shackled as the rest of us under capitalism.
everybody attacking Valve, maybe my tin foil hat is too cozy but it;s a concerted effort by the psychopathic elite to ruin our lives. may their glans be afflicted by a million paper cuts and a salty storm
Sounds like they want to get paid twice.
This whole thing is utter bullshit. It sounds like the game studios DO have a license, and they're claiming that Steam does not but should. Because you can't tell me that Microslop, EA, and Rockstar, three ENORMOUS giants in the gaming industry, have willingly opened themselves up to litigation by not licensing music in their games, something they've been making for decades. Why are they entitled to a license from the developer AND a license from the shop selling it? Of course, they're not, but let's hope this doesn't set precedent that says they are.
all they do is demonstrate why no game should use licensed music ever. cant stream of make videos of those games either without having to worry about this shit.
Not that I love ActMan, but day to day news about Valve controversies do make me feel the same about these claims as ActMan. It really feels like if suddenly everyone wants to sue Valve to the ground so they got destroyed and other lesser fair gaming companies secure their market.
Valve is no angel. But if we compare to others, they are next best thing to a Saint.
This is the type of thing that pushes developers towards AI music generators and similar tools.
Being a piece of shit human being should be enough disbar lawyers.
This was inevitable after valve caved to pressure from card processors. The sharks have smelt blood.
Valve does seem to have a clause in their partner contracts to say all music must have proper licensing so they got that covered. They'll just ask PRS to point out which one and those games are gone within the hour. They can also give PRS a temporary license to the entire library to help them. Things are different if a judge says Valve needs to proactively check licensed materials in the game files, but that requires a library and methods to check against, so that's another discussion.
I think what PRS is stating is that Valve needs a license for the music to even display the game in their store, which is utter nonsense.
They aren't claiming the games are infringing, if that were the case with something like Forza, they would go after the game publisher.
It looks like they are trying to say Valve is infringing by having the games in their store.
I've looked at a few other articles. It seems that PRS says the game publisher has to buy a license for the music in the games, and Valve needs to buy a separate license and pay PRS again for distributing the music in the game. And this would be retro-active, so Valve would have to pay a license fee for every piece of music in every game it ever sold with PRS music. They claim Microsoft and Sony do pay this.
Does this mean places like Walmart and Costco that sell games and media also need to now get licensing?
What about smaller shops and libraries that sell or loan media or other products.
Honestly this just seems like a tax on a tax on a tax. Next in the consumer will need to pay a licensing fee.
That's like suing Spotify, Tidal, Amazon, etc for an artist in their library not licensing a sample correctly
That’s like suing Spotify, Tidal, Amazon, etc for an artist in their library not licensing a sample correctly
No actually, it's like suing Spotify, Tidal, Amazon, etc for an artist in their library licensing a sample correctly.
Not that they like money from Steam despite the games having a licence for the music. If I read the article right.
Once again reminding people that you can sue anyone for anything. Doesn't mean it'll go anywhere
Does the RIAA know these scammers are trying to muscle in on their scam?
For the people that don't see how manufactured some of the attacks against Valve have been lately (not that this will help convince them regardless...)
My hate of the copyright-ownership side of Hollywood / Nashville / Atlanta, etc. has been burning white hot since the days that the RIAA was suing people using P2P networks. But, I had to admit that at least they could probably make a valid claim for copyright infringement. But this?!
It's interesting how it's the "Performing Right Society" (which I've never heard of). The "performing" part of that suggests that maybe they have an issue with people sharing clips containing music, or live streaming games where they share music. But, again, why Valve? Sure, people can share clips with friends. And, occasionally you see developers streaming their games. But, nobody is really "performing" live streams on Steam. I suspect they just think Valve is rich and so they can strong-arm them and Valve will settle to make them go away. I hope they bit off more than they can chew. Valve is indeed rich, and they have a tendency to be stubborn. I think they might well fight, and fight hard.
I wish a possible outcome was that the PRS ceased to exist. But, I suspect they're like a flea or something, and even if you knock them off from this attempt to suck someone's blood, you can't kill them, and they'll just find another victim.
These idiotic lawsuits. First of all, this isn't even Valves responsibility. Second, Steam/Valve are small frys compared to Amazon/Apple/Google/Microsoft. In gaming they may be smaller than Sony and Nintendo and those two have full on closed software platforms. Steam is one software store among many on Windows, Linux, and MacOS. All these groups want to enshittify PC gaming. They want to enshittify personal computing in general. Turn pre-iPhone smartphone operating systems into iOS
They're arguing it under section 20, probably this part
the making available to the public of the work by electronic transmission in such a way that members of the public may access it from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.
It looks like they're arguing that by hosting the games valve are acting as a pirate MP3 site.
I think they would have to prove that they did so knowingly, which can only really be done if they ignored takedown notices.
That is silly, though, since that's something that each developer should be arranging for as part of obtaining the rights to use the music. Either the developer has the rights to use the music as part of the game (and thus sell the game with the music), and by extension Valve can be granted the limited right by the developer to transmit and/or perform the music (in trailers), or the developer does not have such rights and they should not be selling the game in the first place.
There is much to critique Steam for... This? This is nothing but a cash-grab, in my opinion.
Dan Gopal, chief commercial officer, PRS for Music said: "Our members create music that enhances experiences and PRS exists to protect the value of their work with integrity, transparency, and fairness. Legal proceedings are not a step we take lightly, but when a business’s actions undermine those principles, we have a duty to act.
tl;dr they're after the money.
They're extortionists. This outfit is doing RIAA moves and surely annoying as those IP litigators whose business is to let loose bots and flag anything with a DMCA that remotely smacks of what they define as piracy.
They just want to cash in twice.
Looking through the things PRS does, I wonder why anyone would join. Why call yourself an artist when you contribute to an entity that stops people from playing music to animals or whistling to themselves?
Like seriously. It's a group of artists going around shutting down parties. Musicians telling everyone to go home. Probably thinking "it's not my fault, it's the industry, if I want my fair share I HAVE to bully individuals and small businesses."
