Antitrust laws are currently being used only to fine companies, when MS, Intel and Wallmart will be forced to split, let me know. Valve have advantage in that its private company - which attract much less attention from regulators. Another advantage is that nobody (except of them) know real marketshare, profit etc. - which make starting such lawsuit much harder IMO.

It would IMO be much easier to sue MS and Sony for monopoly for digital distribution on their consoles than to sue Valve for having 70% of PC games digital distribution....

You need to stop being such a fan boy and look more objectively at the situation.

Sony will not get sued because Sony is in the business of entertainment.  Video games is just one form of that entertainment business.  They also do movies, music, and television.  Sony competes with industry giants such as Time Warner, Disney, MSNBC/Universal, CBS, and others in multiple areas.  Why does Sony not market to children?  Because it knows Disney would crush them if they tried and it would be foolish to waste money trying when they already have a solid market for the older fans.

Microsoft has been sued before and lost and won.  It won when it was sued on the basis of it's OS being distributed with the PC, Microsoft proved there was nothing preventing a manufacturer of the PC from using a different OS like Apple does with it's own OS, nor did Microsoft participate in activities that would prevent an independent group from pitching their OS to a computer manufacturer.  It lost when they built internet explorer to be in integral part of the operating system forcing people to use it, however since it had not reached market, nor did the integration prevent you from installing and browsing with netscape navigator, they had the opportunity to fix the issue at 'no harm, no foul' rates, meaning, they were not punished for it as they had not caused any damage.

As for their digital distribution over their consoles, your example proves why they won't get sued over it.  These two companies are in direct competition with each other in the console market.  Their games can be purchased in retail stores as well as digital downloads.  Their content is often available on both consoles depending on the developer, and both provide exclusive content to help market their product.  Neither console prevents you from playing a game you purchased if you return what they deem to be too many items.  The consumer is protected from being defrauded in this manner, unlike the practice Valve actively participates in with Steam.

Since you're hung up on consoles, let's add Nintendo to the mix.  Nintendo competes with both Microsoft and Sony in the console business and does quite well for itself.  So there are actually three mega companies competing with each other two of which are based in Japan, negating any and all claims of a monopoly.  Face it, the console market argument is a bad one for you to try and make.

Intel has been warned in Japan a couple of times about unfavorable business practices, but in this case, it's an issue of a foreign government trying to do something about it.   Intel is a US based company and thus not subject to to the harsh punishments of Japanese law, much in the same way Sony and Nintendo would be protected from US law because it is a company based in Japan.  International laws are much weaker then national laws because there is no agency to strictly enforce them, and a nation can decide not to apply international law and find that in it's own country there is enough competition and no evidence of unfair practices so therefor nothing happens.  It's a bitch yes, but that's just how these things work.

Wal-Mart, (note that it's spelled with one l, not two) doesn't even have a large market share when compared to other businesses.  Internationally, yes it has very large numbers that are overly inflated by the fact it doesn't change it's name with each new region it enters like everyone else, but if you look at it's numbers by where it operates, in the US they actually do poorly against national retail and grocery stores.  Hell, in China they're actually the rich person store and everyone else has cheaper prices.  To make a fair comparison to a company like Sears would be unfair to Wal-Mart.  To make it fair, you'd have to compare it to all of the Sears subsidiaries which include Sears Department Stores, Sears Hardware Stores, Sears Grand, Sears Essentials, Sears Appliance and Hardware, Sears Optical, Sears Hometown Stores, Sears Outlet, Sears Parts and Repair Centers, The Great Indoors, Lands' End, Orchard Supply and Hardware, A&E Factory Service, and KMart.  Do you really think Wal-Mart is bigger then Sears in the US market when you take into account all of the different companies Sears owns?  There are other companies just like Sears that rebrand portions of their company that you don't consider when trying to compare numbers.  Before you say Sears should get sued first then before Valve, all they have to do is point to other companies like Home Depot, Ace Hardware, JC Penny, Target, and dozens of other places that compete with them on equal settings and markets.

Fortunately for the business legal world, your opinions don't count for anything.  Clearly you're not as educated on business legalities as you might think or else you wouldn't have said it would be easier to go after the other guys after stating that Valve is a private company.  Valve, being that it is a privately owned company, is actually MUCH MUCH easier to go after in an antitrust and/or monopoly case.  Because it's a few individuals rather then thousands of shareholders that are responsible for the direction of the company, blame can be easily assigned as there is in fact, an owner of the company who is an actual person, not some intangible entity as in a publicly traded company.  That is why they had to form Valve as a Limited Liability Company so that their personal property can't be taken away from them should the company be sued.  I provided you with the perfect example in Standard Oil on what will happen, yet you continue to blindly argue.  Do yourself a favor and educate yourself.  How much US business and consumer law do you know?  The more you argue these points, the more it proves you know nothing about them.

Valve's profits are a matter of public record, private company or not.  They have to pay taxes on every transaction just like every other US business, and they have to pay duty fees on every international transaction.  They also have to report their earnings for each individual game they distribute to it's developer.  They can of course, not give accurate amounts, but that just adds defrauding the government and tax evasion to the list of charges as well as strengthens the position they're participating in unfavorable business practices.

Valve loves the fact that Steam is the de facto choice for digital distribution.  That in and of itself isn't the issue.  The problem is that they defraud customers.  When enough of them get pissed off, they will get sued and their marketshare will become a liability to them.  THAT is when the monopoly laws will apply because the consumer will state they had no choice because there aren't other options.  That is when the US government will step in and the Attorney General will file monopoly charges citing every one of their sales as undercutting the prices of their competition and unfavorable business practices by making what you consider improvements such as their bandwith increases preventing others from competing on equal ground, and defrauding their customers which brought charges against them in the first place, as well as tax evasion and defrauding the government if as you claim Valve is the only one who knows the real numbers.  As in the case of Standard Oil, it may take 40 years for this to happen, but if things stay as they are, it will happen, it's only a matter of time.

It's okay to be a fan of a company, but don't discredit the counter arguments by saying well, they do it too, or someone else should get it done to them first, or the law isn't being applied as harshly as it could be when all you demonstrate is that you don't know the law.  You just look like a fool doing it.  The simple fact that the consumer has yet to revolt against them triggering it, doesn't mean it won't happen.  I don't care about Steam one way or the other, I don't use it, I don't have an X Box or a PS3 or even a Wii.  In fact, Impulse is the first and only time I've used a direct download service because I had no other option in the matter for getting Entrenchment and Diplomacy for Sins and I really didn't like having to do that.  I'm not a fan of that because I prefer to actually own a physical copy and with each update I make myself a physical copy so that I won't ever have to download it again, but digital downloads are the way of the future.  I understand the reason for the move, I support Valve in so much as I wish them all well and healthy profits with their business ventures, but if today's practices are the way they will always operate, then Steam being their little golden goose is going to screw them over.

Wow it's nice to see a company go from strength to strength like Valve. I didn't realise Steam had become so big, makes me wonder how much they make from it. No doubt they are far less greedy than Apple with their iTunes and apps store and stuff. I've always liked Valve because I remember when they first release Halflife and it was like a generational improvement to the genre. I was so bored of FPS's, and then finally, a game came along that really brought with it some new ideas and creativity.

I just hope they don't get too big for their boots now and become evil

I disagree.

I will end this debate with something we can hopefully all agree on:  Future if digital distribution of PC games will be interesting and nothing is certain.

Steam is the best DD service.  There is no way around that.  I own 6 games on impulse, I own 62 on steam.  The great magority of new PC games are using steamworks for DRM and MP functionalty.  Civ 5, Fallout New vegas and DoW2 Retribution are steam games.  You can`t compete with that.  I don`t like it, I`m a Valve fanboy. 

Microsoft recently announced the Games for Windows live marketplace, A direct competitor in the DD arena.  I highly doubt I`ll ever use this service, I`m glad there is competition comming.  I love Valve, I don`t want them to take over PC games.

I actually generally prefer impulse for my digital download needs, although I think it just comes down to the UI. I have no objection at all to using Steam either, but in the end I really just prefer the way in which impulse is laid out. Obviously for games like Civ 5 I had no choice though. I don't know much about the games for window marketplace, but it's probably good to have another competitor in the game. Microsoft is probably better able to discourage games from being exclusive to Steam then Stardock can.

I don`t want to be forced to use steam.  It`s happening right now.  Most PC games are using steamworks.  It drive`s me mad, I understand Dev`s and Pub`s need to protect their property.     I`m all for that.  Steamworks is fine for DD.  If I buy a box at retail, I don`t  want steam forced down my throat.

The biggest issue with Steam is that Steamworks the in-game overlay, achievement, and matchmaking system has no competition besides Games 4 Windows Live, which is like Mike Tyson against Michael J. Fox in the boxing ring.  I'm hoping Impulse::Reactor comes out soon and is as excellent as the hype so companies no longer have to go with Steamworks and therefore Steam integration if they want decent third-person multi-player features.

I fully except Activision/Blizzard to turn Battle.net Into a steam competitor.  I hope they do.  We as PC game player`s need that competition.  Steam as the only route to PC games is a terrible thing.  I think Valve is smart enough not to alienate their core audience .  They treat PC gamer`s very well with free update`s and games. 

I don`t want Valve calling the shots for PC games.  I don`t want anyone calling the shots, The PC is an open platform.  I hope it stays that way.

Steam won't be the only route. Blizz/Act already complains about having to share money with MS and Sony as it is. He'll find a way to squeeze out more blood and that will probebly be an attempt to cut out the middle men.

I thought reactor was already out- I see some games using it in Impulse.

Stardock needs to try undercutting Steam on price to get people to use reactor, maybe even if it means taking a small loss.

(maybe reduce the cut Stardock gets, but Stardock gets an exclusivity period or something?)

Impulse::Reactor doesn't have high profile titles like Modern Warfare 2 or Counter-Strike Source pimping it's features to the mass market.  Impulse is basically where Steam would be if Valve didn't shackle Half-Life 2 with it; fighting for ground.  The only reason Steam is even has 30,000,000 accounts is because Valve forced a signficant portion of them to make those Accounts.
Every Civilisation V owner, every PC Modern Warfare 2 owner, every one who has Half-Life 2, Counter-Strike Source, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead and it's sequel, Supreme Commander 2, PC Fallout: New Vegas and all other Steamwork titles were required to make a Steam Account in order to play their game whether they knew about it pre-purchase or not.  I know when I bought Half-Life 2, creating a Steam Account was a giant "WTF?" moment for me.

If Microsoft was serious and smart, they'd partner up with Impulse and use that as GFWL instead of their crappy XBL service.

Maybe buy Gamersgate also to increase game selection.  Combine those three things and you get a legitimate Steam competitor and a duopoly, which isn't as bad.

And that right there, if that trend continues, is easily construed as anti-competitive behavior.  Not the Valve games, but the other stuff.

And every Elemental owner is forced to make Impulse account.

Yeah, I think this is sort of the point that a lot of people miss with Steam- not all of those 30 million people wanted to have a Steam account. I had to faceplam on another board because one defense of Steam was "well, 30 million satisfied customers says otherwise."

With Steam's numbers, while impressive, shouldn't be taken as final story. If Steam had the only digital version of Civ V and the disc version could be registered or kept separate of Steam, what percentage of gamers would've bothered with Steam? I don't know, but definitely not all and I'd suspect a sizable number of them would have chosen to just skip that step. The same is true with many games.

In fact, perhaps this is a little known fact, but NBA 2K9 (or 2K8, I can't remember exactly....) shipped with Steam as the DRM. Consumer reaction was so fierce and negative that 2K ended up switching to Securom for the next edition. Their boards had tons of complaints. A person who is buying a basketball may not be the super hardcore PC gamer like most of us, so I'm not convinced that Steam has really impressed the common consumer.

Interesting what you mention on NBA 2K8.  But that may only be because sports games are entirely a different thing from other games. 

I was thinking, maybe there's another anti-competitive angle to this that I hadn't considered before, though it's the bad guys  who would be complaining here.

Steamworks DRM is free, which is its big selling point. Couldn't the other DRM makers claim that the integration of Steamworks and Steam DRM would be price dumping against them?   Admittedly none of us like them, but they might have a better case, as price dumping would be clearer to see here.

Steamworks doesn't promote itself as DRM, rather an API that can be intergrated into any game.  A side benefit of using the Steamworks API, which requires the Steam Store Client, is that games on Steam must be authenticated online.  If I recall correctly, this allows it to sidestep any issue.

It doesn't matter what you're promoted as, but what you are used for.  If companies are using this primarily for DRM, which I think could be proven, there could be anti-competitve behavior alleged on that front also.

The question is would this apply to Impulse- and I think it wouldn't, as there aren't really any games exclusive to Impulse that aren't Stardock-published, and I think Gamersgate sells games with Impulse Reactor.

.... and Steamworks games are being sold by retail, D2D and several other small DD services....

Your theory has a problem - the fact that Impulse reactor is also being offered for free to developers and contain most of Steamworks features (including DRM).

Steam is a form of DRM. I don't care what Valve says or their fans, it serves that purpose too.

I didnt say it isnt DRM - I said that both Impulse Reactor and Steamworks offer to developer many same/similar features, including DRM (CEG in case of Steamworks and GOO in case of Impulse Reactor).

Then I think you are confusing terms, or maybe I am. Impulse Reactor isn't the DRM; GOO is. I believe Reactor uses GOO but it's still... separate right. I was under the impression GOO could be used without forcing the Impulse store.