300
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 14 hours ago

And how exactly does this supposed money change the legal arguments made in lawsuit?

[-] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

because why should anyone care about the legal arguments or any ags actual knowledge about said laws if they only serve garbage companies like epic or ubi (and while pretending companies like draft kings dont exist) and that epic hasn’t attempted the same control that steam has, they just suck at the actual service part

and more to my point, this is really what the ny ag thinks is the best use of their time right now, lmao, not any kind of major fraud going on right now that maybe they want to look into if gambling is so very bad

epic games and its ‘coalition of state attorney generals’ is not self serving at all, epic just just really really cares about consumers!

if you can’t compete, litigate

[-] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 13 hours ago

You're going to have to explain how Epic or Ubisoft benefit from shutting down Valve's gambling machine. If it's "Valve makes less money" then that's an irrelevant point because even if you shut down the gambling money Valve is still raking in cash. Valve simply goes from making an insane amount of money to making a slightly less insane amount of money. Valve losing gambling money is going to have zero impact on the PC storefront space. Valve losing the lawsuit in the article, now that could have an impact on the PC storefront space.

And you know, it's pretty sad that you instantly went to "she's corrupt" instead of even giving the smallest benefit of doubt to the possibility that she might be doing it because it's morally wrong. It's a sad because in your mind morality doesn't exist and corruption is everywhere.

[-] baines@lemmy.cafe 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

if you can’t see how hurting valve is a direct benefit to epic or ubi we're wasting my time

irrelevant point? lol that’s not at all how business works

i don’t care about the gambling money beyond the hypocrisy of it while sports betting, digital currency markets and fucking polymarket exist, and i’m claiming shadiness because epic has its hand up multiple ags asses in multiple markets, just take a look at apple or google stores as well as valve, epic is funding this politic to its own benefit because it failed so fucking hard competing the real way and the ags see it as an easy target since coalitions cost money

if she actually gave a damn about gambling we’d be seeing her go after sports betting first by sheer volume, draft kings is fucking disgusting

steam is actually doing some positive things for consumers and it’s asinine to start with valve

if you think morality is involved in the american legal system you live a charmed life

[-] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

if you can’t see how hurting valve is a direct benefit to epic or ubi we’re wasting my time

irrelevant point? lol that’s not at all how business works

Did you even read what I said? Valve losing it's gambling money is going to have no impact on their market share in the PC storefront market space because Valve is already making boatloads of money even without the gambling money. Valve doesn't need to do anything to make up for the loss because they don't need to be greedy. They can eat "the loss" and continue business as usual which means there is no direct benefit for any competing storefront. If anything it might end up being a net negative because (while it probably won't directly impact Epic or Ubisoft) some big studios still use lootboxes and this ruling would further push getting them banned. There's an indirect benefit to Epic of Ubisoft in the form of Valve making less money but when you make insane amounts of money making slightly less insane amounts of money isn't anything Epic of Ubisoft will feel. So yeah, I'd like to see you explain how the gambling lawsuit would directly benefit Epic of Ubisoft.

if she actually gave a damn about gambling we’d be seeing her go after sports betting first by sheer volume

So she shouldn't go after Valve where there's a legitimate case to be made? Because she should be going after some other nondescript entity that she may not even have a case against? Yeah, makes total sense.

if you think morality is involved in the american legal system you live a charmed life

So according to you SKG movement isn't driven by the moral point that we should own the things we buy? So who is funding that initiative? Who gains to benefit from it? Come on, give me the juice. Let me suckle on that conspiracy teat. It's all conspiracies, no good guys ever exists. Ross Scott is a paid actor.

this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
300 points (84.9% liked)

Technology

85110 readers
4599 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS