Talk:Valve Corporation

Question about name of company.

Is valve not called Valve Software rather than Valve Corporation? Correct me if I'm wrong. 70.53.36.40 (talk) 13:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh... Never mind, confused software with the suffix of the company. 70.53.36.40 (talk) 14:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

"Valve Corporation" is the legal name (just like "Microsoft Corporation" or "Apple Inc."), while "Valve Software" is a commonly used alias (next to simply "Valve" and the rarer "Valve Games"). IceWelder [✉] 14:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

If Masem says that Valve Software is the "fake name", why is this even in the article? Vacant0 (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, the NME source Vacant0 added does indeed refer to Valve as "Valve Software": As Kotaku reports, some gamers have already been fooled by Twitter profiles masquerading as Nintendo and Valve Software. The fact that a fake Twitter account also used it doesn't matter, because NME also uses it to mean the real company.

However, I think this one-off mention is not very interesting, and the whole issue is moot. Unless we have some evidence this alternative name "Valve Software" is widely used and notable and matters at all from an enecylopedic perspective, let's just keep it out. Popcornfud (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

"Valve Software" does bring up a lot of hits, so we should acknowledge it, I just dont' think using an article about faked Twitter accounts is the right sourcing for it. We ideally want a business-level article on the name. Masem (t) 15:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Hold up. Valve Software is absolutely not a fake name. It's very clearly a common alternative name and a trade name of the company. Their website is valvesoftware.com. No less than 5 of the currently in-use relable sources have "Valve Software" directly in the article title. This minor dispute completely confuses me. Valve is listed on LInkedin and Crunchbase as Valve Software. Their own Facebook and Github pages, their official accounts, are also named Valve Software. -- ferret (talk) 15:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree SKYISBLUE on Valve Software being their DBA name, but its annoying that I cannot find any source that affirms factually. It's just too clear that "Valve Software" is used throughout their online presence, as well as often referred to in sources, but we don't have a clear source that explains the relation between Valve, LLC/Valve Corporation to Valve Software. Masem (t) 15:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ferret: Just for the record, re: your edit message, no "Valve Software" is obviously not a fake name and I didn't support that interpretation. ;-)

I'm fine with including it in the article if a plurality of sources use it, but I'd really prefer a proper source saying that explicitly if we can get one. Popcornfud (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

I mean, we have 5 sources that call it Valve Software in the title, and many of the rest do so in their prose. No one is going to have written an article to say "Btw, Valve Software is Valve Corporation." It's too much of a sky is blue issue, and obvious from primary sourcing that they go by that name. In regards to the fake twitter issue, the official Valve twitter handle, which is Gold star verified, is "valvesoftware". -- ferret (talk) 16:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that seems reasonable to me. edit: in fact I think if we're going to include it we may as well take it out of the footnote and just put it in the lead proper. Popcornfud (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. This isn't a "some people know it as" situation. This is literally the tradename they present themselves as for all social media and marketing purposes. -- ferret (talk) 16:33, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

We should still try to seek out a source that explains the relationship between terms if we can, but it is not essential to include sourcing that Valve Software is another name for Valve Corp. Masem (t) 16:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Source for arbitration value

On the last line of "Valve Corporation v. Vivendi Universal Games", the the value of the arbitration agreement is tagged as citation needed, but the agreement is mentioned again in the next section, with proper references (currently 125). B. Hudell (talk) 16:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Yep, that's right. Should be fixed now. IceWelder [✉] 16:25, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Valve

The lead says "Valve Corporation, also known as Valve Software, is [...]". It should also say it's generally referred to simply as "Valve". Thousands of sources here, including for example this, this, this, etc. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:9749:A195:AD35:C8D7 (talk) 06:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

The short name can be trivially inferred, like how Microsoft's lead begins with "Microsoft Corporation" and doesn't require us spelling out "Microsoft" immediately after. IceWelder [✉] 06:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hm, yeah, I guess that's true. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:9749:A195:AD35:C8D7 (talk) 06:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Valve Corporation v. Activision Blizzard, Inc. - Paywalled Citation and no resolution

Citation #128 leads to a paywalled version of the case text. However, the case text is freely available through other sources, such as Google Scholar or casetext.com. There is also a mention of $424k that was disputed in this case. I see that the case was affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, but I cannot find a source that verifies if the case was actually settled, in or out of court. Did Valve Corporation receive the disputed $424k from Activision Blizzard, Inc., or was a different settlement reached? JacobJenness (talk) 23:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)