ThaBeefDev

A brief history of engl*nd's relationship with the American Race: -tried to wipe us out by provoking nìggérs and redskins against us (See: Grievance 27, engl*nd's entire existence for centuries has been little more than trying to destroy White nations with non-White biotrash, part of their chr*stcucked race traitor "White Man's Burden") -tried to rob us -tried to kill us when we resisted robbery -got their asses shot off -tried to enslave us to their navy -tried to wipe us out again when we resisted that -got their asses shot off again -stuck us with New Orleans -meddled in the Civil War -birthed all modern zionism -escalated WW1 for zionists -dragged us into WW1 for zionists -instigated and escalated WW2 for zionists -dragged us into WW2 for zionists -created Israel -stuck us with Israel -impotently pissed and moaned at us about everything for the next 80 years while remaining as utterly useless as they always have been -sent the jeeťs they're responsible for feeding in the first fucking place to America to campaign for Kamala the Jeeť The foreign, old world, obsolete and inferior ethnicity of the engl*sh has, for every single moment since the American Race's inception, been its worst enemy. And it will be a great day for the American Race and entire planet when that enemy ethnicity goes extinct in 20 years.

@small_big_pony @AustriaAnime @uniqueusernanme @Beat_Rev @Pirat_Nation TOS are not allowed to violate federal law. Steam enforcing a "most favored nation" policy violates federal law, also EU law. This is not up for discussion.

@AustriaAnime @uniqueusernanme @ThaBeefDev @Beat_Rev @Pirat_Nation It's in the TOS so I doubt it's illegal. By uploading the game you agree not to sell it for cheaper somewhere else. Also, for smaller indie games I doubt Valve is checking.

Consumer Competition Claims (CCC), through GameClaim, has launched a new class action against Valve in the Netherlands. The group claims Valve controls around 85% of the PC game market and uses rules that make it harder for developers to sell games cheaper on other stores. It also argues that Steam’s 30% cut on game sales is too high and shows anti-competitive behaviour. According to CCC, Dutch gamers have paid more than they should due to these practices, with total damages estimated at over €220 million since 2013.. The group says it will first try to reach a settlement with Valve. If that fails, the case could go to court and may take several years to resolve.

@small_big_pony @Beat_Rev @Pirat_Nation Irrelevant to federal law.

@ThaBeefDev @Beat_Rev @Pirat_Nation Ubisoft is in control of the pricing of their own game on steam. It's better for consumers not to have to use a different platform for a cheaper price.

@ElectricCheet4h @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation They are violating it, stop projecting

@ThaBeefDev @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation They aren’t violating it, and stop guzzling cum like a whore

@Chives_AD @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation It's the entire EU law, Article 101. Steam also violated the Sherman Act, US federal law. The opinions of Argentines are, as usual, irrelevant.

@ThaBeefDev @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation Nobody cares what the federal law of the Netherlands is. Valve isn't preventing competition, they're protecting themselves from being used as free advertising, the same way you're not allowed to lure eBayers to another store by putting a link to your Etsy on the ebay listing.

@GetWeirdTX @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation Other stores can charge whatever they like. Enforcing a "most favored nation" policy as the majority market share holder violates the Sherman Act Prohibition on contracts restraining trade or commerce, objectively according to the definition of words an 8th grader should know.

@ThaBeefDev @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation Wait until you stop chimping and look at how much upcharge they have on Apple and Google stores. Do you know how much Epic charges? Microsoft? GoG? You don't know anything. I look forward to your response of negativity without looking at facts.

@Fuggles131766 @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation >holding back ESG

What the fuck is your problem? I see on your profile you’re right wing, yet you’re here chimping about valve, which is probably the only company holding back the tide of ESG censorship bullshit and has been holding the line against pressure from these mothercuckers for years. Who’s fucking side are you on you stupid retard?

The Sherman Act. As it regards the Netherlands, Article 101 of the EU Treaty, which is naturally more anal retentive than the US law. Except for cartoonish villainy, the Sherman Act generally affords a bit of slack to possibly violating activities IF the perpetrator isn't larget enough to materially upset the market. But Steam is indisputably large enough to do that, so enforcing a "most favored nation" policy objectively violates the Sherman Act.

@ThaBeefDev @vov_ass @Pirat_Nation And what federal law was that

@ReaseStoneheart @Pirat_Nation >Selling an item for lower price is "underhanded" Blocking every one of you deranged retards.

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation Ubisoft: *Tries to use underhanded tactics to drive traffic from Steam to their platform* Steam: "Hey, you need to offer discounts to keep prices similar on both platforms, according to our rules." Some doofus: "proof of anticompetition! Steam strongarming the competition!"

@SkirenH @Pirat_Nation Nope. Contracts can't violate antitrust laws. That's the entire point of antitrust law in the first place. Fixing prices is purely anticompetitive and this is probably even more prohibited by EU's Article 101 than the US Sherman Act. You desperately slavebrains have no defense.

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation Valve has in their contracts, that if the game should appear also in other stores, than the price must be the same as in Steam. This is to keep competition going and makes sure no one can make a monopoly! This align with EU law.

@NemoGoMeow @Pirat_Nation By enforcing a most favored nation policy with ~80% market share. This is not up for discussion, the indisputable facts are clear whether you like them or not. This sort of price manipulating anticompetitive bullshit is exactly what the Sherman Act was passed to prevent

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation Ok, now how is Steam restraining trade or commerce? They don't hold game companies hostage with exclusiveness whether permanent or timed exclusives, and game companies are free to sell their games on multiple platforms.

It is fucking wild how many zoomerdrones seem to think Valve is allowed to violate federal law (Sherman Act) just because they like Steam. They aren't. If Steam's so great, it won't need to act in illegally anticompetitive ways to prevent competition. Deal with it.

@criticalhitsTV @Pirat_Nation Because it doesn't matter what Ubisoft's motivations were. Valve violated the Sherman Act. More relevant to the Netherlands, they also likely violated Article 101 of the TFEU.

You brought it up, but now it's irrelevant? You're simply throwing out buzzwords with very little understanding of what they mean. None of this violates the sherman act. You can't accuse Valve of being a monopoly without several other tech giants also falling into that bracket so none of what you've said makes any sense.

@NemoGoMeow @Pirat_Nation In the EU? Articles 101 and 102, apparently. In America, the Sherman Act, which reads, "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal."

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation What laws?

@criticalhitsTV @Pirat_Nation Irrelevant. Valve enforcing a "most favored nation" objectively violates the Sherman Act, which is FEDERAL LAW. This is not up for debate or discussion. All that's left is to determine the damages, and make it clear Steam is not allowed to do that in the future.

Why would I or any consumer care about Ubisoft? So your concern is Ubisoft profit...not the consumer? The problem here is too many of you are ignorant about business. Ask yourself a simple question, "why not offer the lower price on steam as well on Uplay". One price across the board. That would benefit consumers wouldn't it?

@anonemoose25 @Pirat_Nation Retarded fàggót ☝️

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation Paid shill ☝️

@CringeCoomer @AustriaAnime @Bockwus @Pirat_Nation Terms of service don't get to violate federal law.

@AustriaAnime @Bockwus @ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation They agree to this when selling their game on Steam, they could choose not to use the platform altogether but guess what? Their games would sell less because they wouldn't have the Steam infrastructure and customer base to sell their product.

@RdHdSteppeson @Beat_Rev @Pirat_Nation It is scummy.

@ThaBeefDev @Beat_Rev @Pirat_Nation This isn’t scummy

@Bockwus @Pirat_Nation Your "everyone should have a pony" communism aside, Valve enforcing a "most favored nation policy" violates the Sherman Act. Come to terms with it.

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation of course the price should be the same in both stores. if you run a discount on uplay you should have to run a discount on steam too. that's just dirty tactics of ubisoft desperately trying to get more people to their platform

@Akai_Kiseki @Pirat_Nation It's an American company violating the American Sherman Act to fix prices, in addition to surely violating 9001 different eurotard regulations, some of which may actually be reasonable, you blithering retard.

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation So they were arguing for price being the same on each storefront. Yet again, Valve being based.

@AussieFuckery @Pirat_Nation No they weren't, you illiterate retard. They were actively competing. The opposite of being anticompetitive.

@ThaBeefDev @Pirat_Nation You're literally talking about pro-consumer behaviour - in the case you're highlighting, UBISOFT WAS BEING ANTI-COMPETITIVE