So this isn't an actual case that will be tried in a court (not yet at least ahaha). But as we all well know, Valve has been in a rocky relationship with EA lately that has caused EA to pull out a few titles from the Steam Catalogue (most notably and recently Dragon Age 2 and Crysis 2) over digital distribution rights. And the most recent title EA has pulled out from Steam distribution is Battlefield 3. In fact, EA is pushing its own digital distribution service, Origin, to compete with Steam. The problem stemmed from who gets the right to distribute DLCs. Valve argues that, based on the terms of service in the boilerplate language of its contract with EA, that they are the ones who will be distributing DLCs through their online store. Conversely, EA argues that it should be free to provide direct support for players in terms of DLCs and other paid-for-content. Honestly, the only group this situation between the two companies really hurts (or potentially helps from a certain perspective) is the consumer, you and I. Personally I prefer having steam as my single source of origin for any digital copies of games I play. It's inconvenient and messy to have to manage multiple service providers at the same time just to play games. But I'd like to hear all your input. This is a complex contracts and intellectual property issue at large though. It just isn't Valve and EA, but potentially any other publisher that puts its property onto 3rd party digital content delivery services. Who do you think controls how content should be delivered? Does Valve have any say on it? Is EA just flexing its muscle?