CS Ads Lead to Legal Trouble

[CSN NewsBot]

Recent coverage of ads within Counter-Strike games has brought the issue to Valve's attention. In a bit of investigative reporting, Mr. Remo of Shacknews e-mailed Doug Lombardi and received the following response:

At no time did Valve grant permission nor discuss these advertisements with Engage. As such, this is now a legal matter. Advertising or any other commercial use of our games requires our written permission.

This should clear up any speculation as to whether or not Valve had a hand in this advertising program. More than that, though, Valve sounds very heavy-handed in the e-mail. They clearly want the ad program to disappear.



Does a for-profit Valve have a real reason to force community servers to be non-commercial? Those community servers, after all, are free to play on, but aren't free to run.

[DaRk-AnGeL]

Haha, gj Valve. Bringing the game back to where it belongs and what it means to a lot of people.

[Zips]

They do have a real reason. If there was no legal contract between the two parties, there's no way Valve should be made out to look like they're partners with companies such as Subway when they are receiving nothing in return. In terms of what Valve is going to do, I don't think they have any more bubblegum left (off-handed and slightly obscure reference).

[Scanner]

Don't go patting Valve on the back yet, as they haven't stated that they're taking legal action to preserve the ad-free experience we've enjoyed. For all we know, they're just pissed because they're not getting a cut, and once that's ironed out they'll gladly allow things to be spoiled.



That said, I'm not really quite that pessimistic about Valve, and I'm only acknowledging it as a possibility.

[Zips]

I don't think they're stupid. They wouldn't want to pull a major ad-campiagn in their own games like that. It'd piss off far too many customers, and so far Valve has shown they're not exactly ones to actively piss off their customers.

[Gpig]

Zips wrote..

They do have a real reason. If there was no legal contract between the two parties, there's no way Valve should be made out to look like they're partners with companies such as Subway when they are receiving nothing in return. In terms of what Valve is going to do, I don't think they have any more bubblegum left (off-handed and slightly obscure reference).

I don't think referencing the "I'm only good at two things: kicking ass and chewing bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum" quote can really be considered obscure on the internet. I've never seen the movie but I've seen that referenced so fucking much.



Also, I thought assault was a really impressive looking map but other than that and the initial wow effect of source I haven't really drooled at any of the upcoming release screenshots, but man this looks really good. I like the HDR being more subdued like this in CS:S.

[:.:.:]

Zips wrote..

Valve has shown they're not exactly ones to actively piss off their customers.

AWP nerf.

[snkcube]

Good job Valve!

[Gpig]

I just realized I talked about militia in the wrong thread.

[Zips]

:.:.: wrote..

AWP nerf.

They didn't actively sit down and go "Hey, let's do this thing just so the 'pro' players have something new to whine about."



It's a passive pissing off that only aggitates a handful of people at any given time, and never the majority of players (that I've ever seen).

[kerosine99]

Gpig wrote..

I don't think referencing the "I'm only good at two things: kicking ass and chewing bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum" quote can really be considered obscure on the internet. I've never seen the movie but I've seen that referenced so fucking much.

Duke Nukem?

[-:Nighthawk:-]

You read it here first... glad to see VALVe following up on this quickly.



In response to pissing people off, the jumping nerf thing I'd say pissed off a majority of players initially back with 1.4, but only the vocal minority really remained pissed. Aside from that, the only truly major things generally had to do with release dates, heh.

[Ryosuke T]

heh. i knew valve wouldn't let this go by.

[rizzuh]

Edited by [user="2065"] @ [time="1137232415"]

Zips wrote..

If there was no legal contract between the two parties, there's no way Valve should be made out to look like they're partners with companies such as Subway when they are receiving nothing in return.

So if Valve was making the money it is fine, but if the server operators make money there's something seriously wrong? I think that's backwards. Valve shouldn't demand anything from the free servers that support this community. Valve should let the server operators and companies that make their online games actually playable do whatever they want with the hardware and bandwidth that so many admins are freely providing to the community.



Do I think servers should have ads? No. Do I think server admins should have the right to decide that for themselves? Yes. Valve has zero place telling server admins what they can put on their servers, regardless of whatever an un-tested EULA states.

[Splatula]

No, any modification of the game for commercial purposes without express permission is both wrong AND illegal. This goes beyond EULA and straight into intellectual property. Why shouldn't Valve get a cut of Advertising action, the server software is FREE. I can download HLDS anytime, anywhere and set up a server for nothing. Valve has nothing to do with the money server ops are paying to hosting companies for their servers.



I don't know where this, "I paid for the game once, I own Valve now" entitlement crap came from, but you won't see it anywhere else. Why don't you invite me to supper, I could use a new TV, Car and computer.