Aurich Lawson / Getty Images
Apple’s bitter legal dispute with Epic Games over the distribution of Fortnite on iOS it has now managed to rope in Valve. Apple has sued the steam manufacturer for a wide range of data for the sale of computer games, which he said is crucial. But Valve is fighting back against the lawsuit, saying the information is proprietary, not relevant to Apple’s case, and that it’s expensive and difficult to generate.
As discussed in a joint letter from Apple and Valve filed in the Northern District of California this week, Apple’s subpoena in November seeks two major categories of information that Valve refuses to provide:
- Documents sufficient to indicate Valve’s: (a) total annual sales of programs and in-app products; (b) annual advertising revenue from Steam; (c) annual sales of external products attributable to Steam; (d) annual revenue from Steam; and (e) annual earnings (whether gross or net) from Steam; as well as
- (a) The name of each app on Steam; (b) the date the App was available on Steam; and (c) the price of the app and any in-app product available on Steam.
While Valve responded to some other parts of Apple’s subpoena, Apple says the information was “so strongly edited that Apple could not see what information it might contain.”
Why do you need it?
According to Apple, the requested information is the key to setting up other platforms that ‘could potentially be economic substitutes’ for the iOS App Store when it comes to distribution Fortnite, as discussed in previous rulings in the case. Valve’s information is “crucial to calculating the overall market size for Epic’s available digital distribution channels,” says Apple.
But Valve claims that Steam is an unrelated side show in the battle between Apple and Epic. “Valve does not manufacture or sell phones, tablets or video games for mobile devices, or otherwise compete in the mobile market,” the company writes. “Fortnite is not available on Steam, and Epic has publicly and unequivocally stated that it will not offer Fortnite on Steam, unless Valve changes its business model. “
While Apple says that Valve “acknowledges that the requested information exists in some unknown, easily accessible format,” Valve says compliance with it “is an overwhelming amount of work” and “Valve would place an extraordinary burden on a massive amount of [information] to create the documents that Apple is looking for. ‘
Valve says the process involves gathering information from at least four separate databases for thousands of separate items. Valve also says Apple did not offer to cover the cost of this data collection process.
The protection of private data
Apple cites a previous court order for similar sales information from Samsung by arguing that the court should compel Valve to comply with it. But Valve claims that “Apple, Google and Samsung are competing with each other in the mobile applications market. Valve is not competing in the market.”
Valve also argues that the fact that it is a private company provides an important distinction from the public Samsung. “Valve has chosen to remain partially private to avoid the burden of public disclosure and reporting requirements to which companies such as Samsung or Google are subject,” the company writes. “Valve does not disclose its sales and revenue information and forecasts, and Valve derives significant value and benefit from the confidentiality of such information, including by keeping it out of the hands of companies such as Epic, which also sells computer games. . “
Valve’s argument is growing that it’s more important given the company’s 2018 decision to effectively block services like Steam Spy or Ars’ own Steam Gauge to create public estimates of Steam sales based on examples of individual public user account data. Valve said in July 2018 that it was working on a “more accurate” replacement of the Steam Spy data, but only released sporadic and incomplete summaries of the Steam market in the years that followed.
In any case, Apple claims that any confidential or sensitive competitive information provided by Valve may be covered by a protection order, such as that applicable to Samsung. Apple also claims that “the information sought by this request does not outline future plans or strategic assessments … there is no significant risk of competitive or economic harm [to Valve]. ”
But Valve remains adamant that the information is private and unnecessary for Apple’s current legal battle. “Somehow, a computer game maker that does not compete in the mobile market or sell ‘apps’ is portrayed as a key figure in a dispute over mobile applications,” Valve writes. “It is not.”