Aurich Lawson / Getty Images
Apple’s bitter legal dispute with Epic Games over the distribution of Fifteen days on iOS now got rope at Valve. Apple has subpoenaed the Steam maker for a wide range of PC game sales data that it says are crucial to its case. But Valve is fighting this subpoena, saying its information is proprietary, not relevant to Apple’s case and would be expensive and difficult to generate.
As discussed in a joint letter from Apple and Valve filed in the Northern California District Court this week, Apple’s November subpoena seeks two broad categories of information that Valve refuses to provide:
- Sufficient documents to show: (a) total annual sales of apps and in-app products; (b) Steam’s annual advertising revenue; (c) annual sales of external products attributable to Steam; (d) annual Steam revenues; and (e) Steam’s annual earnings (gross or net); as
- (a) The name of each Application on Steam; (b) the date range when the Application was available on Steam; and (c) the price of the App and any in-app products available on Steam.
Although Valve responded to some other parts of Apple’s subpoena, Apple says the information has been “so heavily edited that Apple cannot discern what information it may contain”.
Why do you need this?
The information requested, says Apple, is instrumental in establishing other platforms that “can be cost effective substitutes” for the iOS App Store in distribution Fifteen days, as discussed in previous case decisions. Valve’s information is “crucial to calculating the total market size for Epic’s available digital distribution channels,” says Apple.
But Valve argues that Steam is an unrelated secondary spectacle in the battle between Apple and Epic. “Valve does not manufacture or sell phones, tablets or video games for mobile devices, nor does it compete in any other way in the mobile market,” writes the company. “Fifteen days is not available on Steam, and Epic has stated publicly and unequivocally that it will not offer Fifteen days on Steam, unless Valve changes its business model. “
Although Apple says that Valve “admits that the requested information exists in some undisclosed and readily accessible format”, Valve says that compliance would involve “an enormous amount of work” and “would impose an extraordinary burden on Valve to consult, process and combine a lot of [information] to create the documents that Apple is looking for. “
Valve says the process would involve collecting information from at least four separate databases for thousands of separate items. Valve also says that Apple has not offered to cover the costs of this data collection process.
Protection of private data
Apple cites a previous court order to obtain similar sales information from Samsung in arguing that the court should compel Valve to comply. But Valve argues that “Apple, Google and Samsung compete with each other in the mobile application market. Valve does not compete in that market.”
Valve also argues that being a private company offers an important distinction from public Samsung. “Valve chose to remain private in part to avoid the burden of disclosing public companies and reporting requirements that companies like Samsung or Google are subject to,” writes the company. “Valve does not disclose its projections and sales and revenue information, and Valve gains significant value and advantage from the confidentiality of such information, including by keeping it out of the reach of companies like Epic, which also sell PC games. “
Valve’s argument gains relevance given the company’s decision in 2018 to effectively block services such as Steam Spy or Steam Gauge from Ars himself to create public Steam game sales estimates based on sample data from individual public user accounts. Valve said in July 2018 that it was working on a “more accurate” replacement for Steam Spy data, but has only released sporadic and incomplete summaries of the Steam market in the years since.
In any case, Apple argues that any confidential or sensitive competitive information provided by Valve may be covered by a protection order, such as that which exists for Samsung. Apple also argues that “the information sought in this request does not detail future plans or involve strategic assessments … there is no substantial risk of competitive or economic loss [to Valve]. “
But Valve remains adamant that the information is private and unnecessary for Apple’s current legal struggle. “Somehow, in a dispute over mobile apps, a PC game maker that doesn’t compete in the mobile market or sell ‘apps’ is being portrayed as a key figure,” writes Valve. “It is not.”