Valve is facing a new legal headache as a tribunal in the UK has ruled that a lawsuit filed against it in 2024, accusing the company of using Steam’s dominance of the PC gaming marketplace to overcharge gamers and muscle out competition, can move ahead.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of children’s digital rights campaigner Vicki Shotbolt as a collective action—functionally similar to a class action—representing an estimated 14 million consumers in the UK. Very briefly, it alleges that Valve prevents game makers from offering their products at lower prices on other platforms, requires that all add-on content for games purchased on Steam also be purchased through Steam, and that Valve’s “excessive commission” has resulted in inflated prices.

Valve had argued that the case should not be allowed to proceed as a collective action on a number of technical grounds, including that it will be difficult to accurately determine who is eligible to claim damages. The Competition Appeal Tribunal (via the BBC) disagreed, however, declaring that “the certification criteria were satisfied and it was appropriate to grant a CPO on an opt-out basis.”

A website dedicated to the action at steamyouoweus.com states that “this claim does not want to, and is not about, shutting down Steam or restricting gamer access to the platform in any way,” but merely seeks to ensure Steam does not operate “in a way that is detrimental to the consumer.” It also says that while Steam appears to offer lower prices than other platforms, that’s merely the result of Steam’s “Price Parity Obligation,” which prevents game sellers from listing products on other platforms unless the price on Steam is the same or lower.

That’s a change from the website in its initial form, which as seen on the Wayback Machine had tougher and more straightforward allegations about Valve’s alleged anti-consumer practices, and may reflect certain unspoken realities: Steam may not be good for consumers but consumers sure do love Steam, and the possible loss of access to the storefront isn’t likely to score big points in public opinion.

The tribunal ruling is a loss for Valve, but a preliminary one, meaning only that will have to defend its practices in court, rather than dodging the bullet entirely. That’s a process that could drag out for years: Valve is facing a similar suit in the US that was initially filed in 2021.