Re: [新聞] 遊戲開發商Wolfire針對Steam平台發起反壟

瘋法貼vt烤肉分享觀後心得　好歹還會講一下內容 貼英文就直接不翻了　讓大家自己看== 不愧是大公典範　我很尊敬瘋法 ※ 引述《wizardfizban (瘋法師)》之銘言： : Judge dismisses antitrust lawsuit filed against Valve : https://www.pcgamer.com/judge-dismisses-antitrust-lawsuit-filed-against-valve/ : 之前Valve向法官要求駁回，因為證據完全不足。 : 最新消息就是法官同意了Valve的看法，所以這個反壟斷案被駁回了。 : 駁回的理由在這 : The ruling, available in full on CourtListener, says Wolfire's lawsuit falls : short on two separate points. First, the claim that Valve is illegally tying : the Steam store to the platform—essentially, using the near-monopoly of : Steam as a library, launcher, and social media platform to force people to : buy games through the Steam storefront—is rejected because the allegations : in the lawsuit suggest that the Steam platform and storefront are in fact "a : single product within the integrated game platform and transaction market." 法官認為 Wolfire 有兩點主張，無法讓法官同意 第一點是主張 Valve 把 Steam 商店非法地跟 Steam 平台綁在一起 實質上就是利用 Steam 作為統合遊戲庫、執行器與社群媒體功能的平台， 這種準獨佔性 強迫人們透過 Steam 商店買遊戲 法官反對的原因是認為這主張意味著 Steam 平台和商店實際上就是 「在遊戲（相關服務）整合平台與交易市場中的單一個商品」 : Wolfire's lawsuit also claims that Valve uses its near-monopoly to charge an : excessive fee to sellers—30%—that wouldn't be sustainable in a competitive : marketplace. That claim resulted in some interesting conversations earlier : this year, but the judge rejected the argument, noting that Valve's take has : remained unchanged throughout Steam's history, even as other online stores : charging lower percentages have come and gone. : "Therefore, it would appear that the market reality, at least as plead, is : that [Valve's] fee is commensurate with the Steam Platform's value to game : publishers," the ruling states. Wolfire 第二點主張是說 Valve 用這種準獨佔性要求賣家付出 30% 的高額手續費 在競爭強烈的市場中，對賣家來說是很重的負擔 法官駁回了這個主張 他說從有 Steam 以來，雖然期間也有其他更低抽成的網路商店來來去去， 但 Valve 的抽成比率從未變過 所以法官認為從市場現實來看 （Valve 收的）手續費對於遊戲出版商而言 是符合 Steam 平台的價值的 哀，這個社會是現實的 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 36.225.112.109 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/C_Chat/M.1637411163.A.E07.html