US Federal Video Game ban

[Foxrun]

Does Valve have anything planned for the eventual ban?

[xBCxRangers]

引用自 Brian9824：

snip

If you believe anything represented in the magazine article of just last month is false, or misrepresented or misinformation, i suggest you write to them.

But we'd have to our heads examined to listen to a leaderboard enthusiast on a gaming site, then that of a credible middle of the road magazine.

[Brian9824]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

引用自 Komarimaru：

So, you counter facts with jargon? That's a weird take for sure.

No, we should believe a gaming poster on Steams "facts" as opposed to an accredited magazine with editors and a vetting process.

If you and he feel the fact presented in the magazine of just last month are false, write to them.

You didn't read the article clearly. it doesn't mention ANYTHING about Trumps CURRENT stance on Section 230. It actually confirmed what I said if you read it

And while anti-Section 230 sentiment has quieted down a bit in recent years

Trump stopped all talk of Section 230 as soon as it benefitted him

引用自 xBCxRangers：

引用自 Brian9824：

snip

If you believe anything represented in the magazine article of just last month is false, or misrepresented or misinformation, i suggest you write to them.

Article isn't false, your reading of it is faulty. It clearly stated Trump's PAST views on Section 230 from his presidency which was 4 years ago.

During Donald Trump's presidency, he was an enthusiastic advocate for repealing Section 230.

His views back then are different then they are now. Hence why you can't find any comments from him about Section 230 since he started his social media company. They don't exist.

As I already stated things have changed since then.

[Brian9824]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

Here is the magazine article yet again. I suggest you write to them, and clarify your opinions to them.

https://reason.com/2024/10/07/hillary-clinton-wants-to-repeal-section-230/

Yes, i'm familiar, clearly you haven't read it or you'd have seen I quoted directly from it. Ill repeat the quotes from your own article.

It doesn't talk about Trump's CURRENT stance on Section 230, it only discusses what his stance was YEARS ago before it benefitted him

During Donald Trump's presidency, he was an enthusiastic advocate for repealing Section 230.

It also confirms what I stated and notes that in recent years the stance on going against Section 230 has dropped hence why Trump has not mentioned it in YEARS

And while anti-Section 230 sentiment has quieted down a bit in recent years

You have to do more then read the headline of the article and actually read the entire article.

The facts are that Trump has not once mentioned Section 230 since his own Social Media company launched and he now takes advantage of it and uses it himself.

[xBCxRangers]

And so, whether it's current events in Steam and reaching the highest levels of our government.

https://www.pcgamer.com/software/platforms/steam-is-an-unsafe-place-for-teens-and-young-adults-us-senator-warns-gabe-newell-of-more-intense-scrutiny-from-the-government-if-valve-doesnt-take-action-against-extremist-content/

https://www.vice.com/en/article/senator-asks-gabe-newell-why-steam-hosts-so-much-neo-nazi-content/

The report and recommendations of GAO (Government Accountability Office) cited here...about the video gaming industry in general, as far other social mediums..

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106262

The Kids Online Safety Act...

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1409/text

Or Section 230 as we just went over, yes. There is a risk of our access to our games, or how we may access them.

Will there be a Federal Ban? Likely no.

But as was said, more appropriately what we see in Germany and Australia, in an industry much more regulated.

And a forum where the owner will have to make decisions on what he thinks is best for his companies interests. My guess is, either a total revamp, and even other alternatives to the forums.

The above circumstances, are likely going to change things. How they will change, i suppose we will see.

[xBCxRangers]

And lets not forget the CA Law

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/california-law-compels-digital-storefronts-to-inform-players-they-dont-own-their-games

As well as Mr Newell changing our TOS in the dead of night, to control the amount of arbitrees looking to sue him...

https://www.engadget.com/gaming/valve-cuts-binding-arbitration-from-its-steam-user-agreement-174529582.html

And so, compounding all of these matters combined, i think its rather safe to say, changes will be happening on Steam, at least in the United States.

[C²C^Guyver |NZB|]

"As well as Mr Newell changing our TOS in the dead of night, to control the amount of arbitrees looking to sue him..."

You act like that was the first time it was ever changed.........

It's also not your ToS and they are Valves' terms....not yours.

[Boblin the Goblin]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

And lets not forget the CA Law

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/california-law-compels-digital-storefronts-to-inform-players-they-dont-own-their-games

As well as Mr Newell changing our TOS in the dead of night, to control the amount of arbitrees looking to sue him...

https://www.engadget.com/gaming/valve-cuts-binding-arbitration-from-its-steam-user-agreement-174529582.html

And so, compounding all of these matters combined, i think its rather safe to say, changes will be happening on Steam, at least in the United States.

Oh, so next is the part where everyone gets told to have a good day because information was proven incorrect.

Cool.

[xBCxRangers]

引用自 C²C^Guyver |NZB|：

It's also not your ToS and they are Valves' terms....not yours.

Mr Newell under the current mass circumstances, is in deep doo doo. And i wish others luck in trying to make a mere nickel appear to be fifty cents. It is what it is. Trouble.

Good Luck

[Brian9824]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

Can't help but noticed you never answered a basic question.

Do you have any links to where Trump has talked about getting rid of Section 230 that has taken place since he started his own social media company and has enjoyed the protections it gave him?

I'm still waiting for you to answer. Its either No, or a Yes and you give us the link. It's not hard.

引用自 xBCxRangers：

Will there be a Federal Ban? Likely no.

At least you finally admitted that the response i posted back on the first page disproving the claim and that there was never a ban attempted or called for was right. It took long enough

[C²C^Guyver |NZB|]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

引用自 C²C^Guyver |NZB|：

It's also not your ToS and they are Valves' terms....not yours.

Mr Newell under the current mass circumstances, is in deep doo doo. And i wish others luck in trying to make a mere nickel appear to be fifty cents. It is what it is. Trouble.

Good Luck

He's always in trouble according to you, yet nothing ever happens.

[Boblin the Goblin]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

引用自 C²C^Guyver |NZB|：

It's also not your ToS and they are Valves' terms....not yours.

Mr Newell under the current mass circumstances, is in deep doo doo. And i wish others luck in trying to make a mere nickel appear to be fifty cents. It is what it is. Trouble.

Good Luck

Called it.

引用自 Boblin the Goblin：

引用自 xBCxRangers：

And lets not forget the CA Law

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/california-law-compels-digital-storefronts-to-inform-players-they-dont-own-their-games

As well as Mr Newell changing our TOS in the dead of night, to control the amount of arbitrees looking to sue him...

https://www.engadget.com/gaming/valve-cuts-binding-arbitration-from-its-steam-user-agreement-174529582.html

And so, compounding all of these matters combined, i think its rather safe to say, changes will be happening on Steam, at least in the United States.

Oh, so next is the part where everyone gets told to have a good day because information was proven incorrect.

Cool.

[xBCxRangers]

引用自 C²C^Guyver |NZB|：

引用自 xBCxRangers：

Mr Newell under the current mass circumstances, is in deep doo doo. And i wish others luck in trying to make a mere nickel appear to be fifty cents. It is what it is. Trouble.

Good Luck

He's always in trouble according to you, yet nothing ever happens.

:happysmile13:

He was forced to have to attend a deposition, after kicking and screaming about it..

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/gabe-newell-ordered-to-make-in-person-deposition-for-valve-v-wolfire-games-lawsuit

And that was by a third rate law firm. If he was angered about that, i wonder how a subpoena from the Senate Intelligence Committee may affect him?

[Boblin the Goblin]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

引用自 C²C^Guyver |NZB|：

He's always in trouble according to you, yet nothing ever happens.

:happysmile13:

He was forced to have to attend a deposition, after kicking and screaming about it..

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/gabe-newell-ordered-to-make-in-person-deposition-for-valve-v-wolfire-games-lawsuit

And that was by a third rate law firm. If he was angered about that, i wonder how a subpoena from the Senate Intelligence Committee may affect him?

And the misinformation continues.

[rawWwRrr]

"kicking and screaming"

Dude can barely run from bow to stern on one of his yachts, but apparently has enough energy to kick and scream.

[Crystal Sharrd]

引用自 xBCxRangers：

引用自 Soren：

To be fair. If Section 230 was repealed, that would actually kill these forums. That is the one policy I can think of that would actually kill the steam forums.

It'd also kill youtube, twitter, tiktok, instagram, facebook, bluesky, and most other internet websites. At least, kill them in how they currently operate. No more random commentators allowed on your website since you'd be legally liable for everything they say.

And the issue is, the matter bipartisan. Both Trump and Hillary Clinton want it repealed, as well as bipartisan support amongst politicians. This article from just last month...

https://reason.com/2024/10/07/hillary-clinton-wants-to-repeal-section-230/

"Clinton told CNN that "national action" to regulate tech companies "should be at the top of every legislative, political agenda." And alas, no matter who wins the presidential election in November, we're likely to see a leader who wants to weaken or abolish this law. Not only does Trump oppose Section 230, but Democratic nominee Kamala Harris has been crusading to weaken Section 230 since her days as attorney general of California".

Repealing Section 230 is the wrong way to do it. Competent politicians would pass our own version of the European Union's GDPR.