Skip Navigation

Steam doesn’t want to pay arbitration fees, tells gamers to sue instead

20 comments
  • Big win for consumers, at least in the US. People tend to do better in courts here than they do in arbitration (where one side pays the judge(arbitrator)).

  • "Specifically, the named Plaintiffs won binding decisions from arbitrators rendering Valve's arbitration provision unenforceable for both lack of notice and because it impermissibly seeks to bar public injunctive relief."

    So none of these stupid clauses are valid? FOO FYEAH!

  • Anyone can ELI5 this thing? I'm pretty lost

    • Twofold: One, they lost a case in arbitration that basically said arbitration isn't usable.

      Two: Lot of companies do arbitration to avoid court, which works fine and is cheaper if you're not getting taken to court much. If 75,000 people that could do a class action suit all go to arbitration though, the benefit is lost. Lawyers threatened that. 3 grand a arbitration case x 75,000 people == 225 million dollars on fees alone.

20 comments