this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
695 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

82494 readers
5112 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
695
Valve Sued By The Performing Rights Society Over Music Rights in Games Valve Doesn’t Make or Own (www.gamesindustry.biz)
submitted 1 day ago by netweirdo@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world
225 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The Performing Right Society (PRS) has "commenced legal proceedings" against Steam owner Valve over the use of its members' works on Steam "without permission."

The organization claims that while games right across the spectrum use music to "transform play into emotional, immersive experiences," Valve has "never obtained a licence for its use of the rights managed by PRS on behalf of its members, comprising songwriters, composers, and music publishers."

PRS claims "many game titles which incorporate PRS members' musical works are made available on Steam," including "high profile series" such as Forza Horizon, FIFA/EA FC, and GTA.

PRS said that as it had sought to work with Valve about the licensing issues "for many years without appropriate engagement from Valve," it has now issued legal proceedings under the UK's s20 Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988 and requires any game that uses PRS' works to obtain a licence.

"The litigation will progress unless Valve Corporation engages positively with discussions and takes the necessary license to cover the use of PRS repertoire, both retrospectively and moving forwards," the organization said in a press statement.

Dan Gopal, chief commercial officer, PRS for Music said: "Our members create music that enhances experiences and PRS exists to protect the value of their work with integrity, transparency, and fairness. Legal proceedings are not a step we take lightly, but when a business’s actions undermine those principles, we have a duty to act.

"Great video games rely on great soundtracks, and the songwriters and creators behind them deserve to have their contribution recognised and fairly valued."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

... but that only makes sense if you genuienly believe that Rockstar and/or EA have less cash than Valve, and/or Rockstar and EA never had their own relevant liscensing agreements.

I may be wrong, but as best I can tell, there is no precedent in UK law for a platform/retailer being found liable under the cited Section 20, unless the content being distributed/retransmitted/sold itself did not have proper liscensing arrangements, and it can be proven that the platform/retailer/retransmitter knew that to be the case.

I kind of find it unlikely that Rockstar and EA did/do not have liscensing agreements in place.

My theory?

The entire Publically Traded gaming world seems to be mobilizing and coordinating efforts to get every kind of secondary organization they are connected to, to sue Valve, right now.

Because they are all financially imploding, and they're trying to do as much damage as possible to Valve, who isn't a part of their club, as a means of trying to level the playing field.

All these people on the boards of top gaming companies... are also on the boards of other top gaming companies, they know each other, they have people and contacts who sit in all the gaming industry lobbying groups, and the astroturf fake 'gamer advocacy' groups, in the IP rights groups, etc etc.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

So what you're saying is, this lawsuit, and likely many others, is publishers-and-their-investors-who-want-to-not-have-to-go-through-steam-and-have-or-want-to-have-competing-but-monopolies-on-their-own-games-and-storefronts backed.

Feels like petulant publishers. "If I have to get licenses, so should the storefront dis isn't fairrrrrrrr waahhhhhhhh"

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 23 hours ago

That hurt my brain to read, but I think, basically yes.

Its a cabal of mostly vertically integrated companies vs basically a horizontal monopoly that gatekeeps all of them, that'd they've all tried and failed or are currently failing to break through.

And yeah, petulant publishers does sound like a match to me.

Its basically mob tactics, just higher class.