Valve Bullying Cybercafes Over Licensing?
The Importance of writes "Yesterday, as mentioned on Slashdot, Valve announced arrests relating to the theft of Half-Life 2 code. Gabe Newell, Valve's CEO, was quoted as saying, 'Everyone here at Valve is once again reminded of how much we owe to the gaming community.' Demonstrating its appreciation of the gaming community, Valve also threatened to sue a cybercafe offering Counter-Strike without the correct licensing. This may sound fair enough, but while companies like Microsoft allow cybercafes the right to offer games as long as they buy each copy of the games they use, Valve has what are generally considered the worst cybercafe licensing terms there are. Moreover, instead of merely sending a cease and desist letter ('knock it off or we will sue'), Valve sent a ' pay us big bucks for a license or we'll sue letter'. In other words, unless the cybercafe prepays for a one-year license starting at the time the letter was received, they will be sued."
Valve owns Counter-Strike. They bought it, and now have the legal rights to do whatever they wish to it. At this point, I would say that Valve has probably rewritten most of the original code that was once in Counter-Strike. With that said, is the licensing just? Maybe not, Valve should refund all the cybercafe's the money that they spent on the boxed items.
Although, the cybercafe program that Valve has allows all of the Valve's games to be playable for $9/month (per computer)... unless it's been recently changed (I don't have the time [or need] to go check the Steam website). Alot of these cybercafes make more than that per computer, especially coming into the summer season. Tournaments are another thing - more money, more publicity.
I'm f#$king magic!
The fact is they DID make a profit off it, the retail version of CS. Valve did not make CS, but CS DID make Valve. They should not forget this and should support these cafes, because without them Valve would be squat. They should chanrge a nominal fee, based on monthly usage numbers.
Interestingly enough, Microsoft has put a similar clause in their frontpage EULA:
How could I say to men: "Speak louder, shout! For I am deaf!"? -Ludwig van Beethoven
Wrong. The RIAA has people that go around to check if people are playing over the air music in a place of business with out paying the correct 'tax' to them.
You just can't turn a radio on and allow your customers the ability to here it. Hell, those customers might buy their music and that would be...
Restaurants under 3,750 gross square feet (not counting the parking lot) will be exempt
from paying royalties on radio and television music only.
(That is the size of 2 normal homes, IOW a small restaurant)
Also, if you play live music ANY time, even once per year you have to pay for a license. One also has to pay a fee if you use CD's or any other form of non-broadcast music.
Are you guys even aware of what the terms are? It's not that LAN Centers are trying to screw valve. A copy of the game is legally purchased for each machine. Fair enough right? No, Valve insists on an additional $10 per machine per MONTH. I operate 2 centers with 20 computers each. I purchased legally 40+ copies of Halflife BEFORE Steam was released. We were legal until they made this change to the steam engine. They change to STEAM and then decide we are illegal if we don't pony up the cash every month. That is not a fair business practice. If you buy a car and pay it off, you don't expect your manufacturer to come back 2 years later and start billing you monthly to use it. Thats crazy. If it was that way from the begining or even with Halflife2 that is fine and their right. To change the rules years after things have been in place is crap. Thats just my side and opinion on it. Please reread those term above. On my 40 machines, I have to pay $400 a MONTH to valve for a game I already purchased. So after a year I have paid an additional $4,800 to Valve. That doesn't count the 40+ licenses I bought originally on top of that fee. Consider Steam gone from my centers.