Comment on Valve Sued By The Performing Rights Society Over Music Rights in Games Valve Doesn’t Make or Own

psx_crab@lemmy.zip ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

• Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  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.

  source

  • RobotToaster@mander.xyz ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    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.

    source

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Ok thanks, I assumed it was in USA, since Valve is American.

      source

      • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        That myth was largely created by McDonald’s after they were sued for giving a lady third degree vagina burns and a fused labia. “Haha, Americans are so frivolous with lawsuits, they’d sue a company for serving coffee hot enough to make you need skin grafts”.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Ulrich@feddit.org ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I mean many of those publishers, like it says in the article, are “high profile” and will have more than enough money to cover a music copyright issue.

    But suing Valve means you only need to sue 1 company instead of dozens, and it also makes Valve responsible for keeping the songs out of its entire library of tens of thousands of games.

    source
  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Theres also the factor of suing steam is like getting to sue all the ofenders at once without actually putting in the work to sue each individual studio that used the music.

    source

    • qaeta@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      The point is the studios WEREN’T offending. The music was licenced for the games. PRS wants to double dip by forcing Valve to also pay because they are distributing it.

      source
    • Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Seeing that this is in UK, my guess is that if they try to take it to court, the court will simply throw the case out.

      source
  • zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    brb suing VALVe to get 50 million, just so that I can send it back to GabeN and demand a deadline for HL3.

    source

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I am pretty sure I saw that HL3 was confirmed. 😜

      source

      • zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Stop playing with my feelings.

        source
• CameronDev@programming.dev ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  What are the odds that PRS doesn’t represent the rights on the music they claim to?

  source

  • psx_crab@lemmy.zip ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I’d like to say highly likely but upon reading a bit on what they are, it’s highly unlikely. They’re a union focusing on publishing right of music, so they definitely represent the owner of the music. But still insane.

    source
  • ohulancutash@feddit.uk ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    They do.

    source
• cabbage@piefed.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I think it would be reasonable if this was a problem of small indie titles that do not have a publisher and basically wouldn’t exist without Steam. If Valve allows for content on their platform they have an obligation to ensure this content is legal. If a supermarket cooperates with a local farmer to sell their produce directly without middle men, it’s partly their responsible if the produce is made using illegal pesticides.

  However, it seems unreasonable when it’s about stuff like Forza and FIFA. Then sue Microsoft and EA, for fucks sake. These games have publishers.

  source

  • qaeta@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    That’s the point though, the content IS legal. The game devs paid for the licence. PRS are trying to double dip saying you need a separate licence to distribute it too.

    source
  • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    If a supermarket cooperates with a local farmer to sell their produce directly without middle men, it’s partly their responsible if the produce is made using illegal pesticides.

    No that’s of how it works…well, anywhere. In your analogy, the supermarket relies on the supplier being truthful with their documentation for their production. That’s as far as their responsibility goes legally, they have no obligation to investigate the suppliers claims any further.

    source

    • cabbage@piefed.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      relies on the supplier being truthful with their documentation for their production

      So the supermarket needs documentation and to take precautions, because they are to a certain extent responsible for the legality of the stuff they are selling.

      In the real world supermarkets don’t just pick up carrots from some random guy showing up with a trailer full of them. In online markets, this is closer to how it works. Those running and profiting off online platforms should be accountable for what they sell. If Amazon lists electrical products that don’t meet fire safety standards on their website they should be held accountable for selling these products, even if they only act as middle men.

      If companies can just take the money without any responsibility we’re fucked.

      source

      • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        The seller is only responsible for checking that the product is legal, not whether or not the information and documentation provided by the manufacturer is falsified. In this case, if a game dev accepts that they of course have all the necessary licenseses for game assets (which valve definitely has a clause with), then valve has done their part. If it turns out the manufacturer mislead them, it’s the manufacturer who’s in trouble, not the seller.

        source

        • -> View More Comments