Dbrand Halts Steam Machine Companion Cube Sales
▼ Summary
– Dbrand announced a “Companion Cube” accessory for the Steam Machine, modeled after the Portal weighted companion cube, but was forced by Valve to pull the product due to intellectual property infringement.
– Dbrand complied with Valve’s takedown notice, removing the product from its website and redirecting the product page to a Reddit post explaining the situation, though the original page was archived.
– The Companion Cube was the result of seven months and over a thousand hours of engineering work, producing four sets of injection molds, and was Dbrand’s second-fastest-selling product behind the Switch 2 Killswitch.
– Dbrand attempted to retroactively seek licensing rights from Valve after receiving the takedown notice, but Valve refused, leading to criticism that Dbrand should have secured a license before development and sales.
– Commenters noted that Dbrand’s failure to approach Valve beforehand, despite a prior similar issue with Sony over PS5 faceplates, damaged goodwill and made Valve’s IP enforcement necessary to protect its brand.
Accessory maker Dbrand has been forced to pull its Companion Cube for the Valve Steam Machine after receiving a takedown notice from Valve’s legal team. The product, a shell modeled after the iconic Portal weighted companion cube storage box, had been announced to massive interest just a week prior. Dbrand attempted to retroactively secure a licensing deal from Valve in response to the notice, but it was too late. The company has now scrubbed the Companion Cube from its website and social media, redirecting the product page to a Reddit post explaining the situation. (The original page was archived before it vanished.)
In a statement posted to the r/Dbrand subreddit, the company revealed that the Companion Cube represented seven months and over a thousand hours of engineering work, resulting in four sets of injection molds. It was reportedly Dbrand’s second-fastest-selling product ever, trailing only the Switch 2 Killswitch. Despite this, Dbrand acknowledged that Valve’s legal team contacted them to assert that the Companion Cube was Valve’s intellectual property and that no license had been granted for its use. Fans have reacted with a mix of disappointment and understanding, with some criticizing Dbrand for not approaching Valve before investing so heavily, while others note that Valve may have legitimate concerns about endorsing unverified engineering and thermal performance.
The online reaction has been sharp. One commenter noted, “A thousand hours of work and not a single minute dedicated to actually securing a license to profit off another company’s IP. Good job, Dbrand, you played yourself.” Another remarked that the company seems to be “role playing a Chaotic Good DnD character” with no discipline. Some questioned why Valve wouldn’t simply strike a deal now that the product is prototyped and generating interest. One user speculated that Valve may have been waiting to see if Dbrand would contact them to negotiate, and their failure to do so burned any goodwill. Another added, “This is the embodiment of the bike fall meme.”
The situation mirrors Dbrand’s earlier Darkplate controversy with Sony, where the company released PS5 faceplates before Sony secured a design patent. In that case, Dbrand was not the only company exploiting the gap, but this time, Valve acted swiftly. As one user pointed out, “Valve has to protect their IP or lose it. If they didn’t stop Dbrand, anyone would be entitled to also steal the IP.” Others noted that Dbrand is lucky this wasn’t Nintendo, which likely would have escalated to a lawsuit.
Despite the setback, some fans hold out hope. One commenter noted that the product looked “really nice and well built,” and that Dbrand at least acknowledged their mistake. But the prevailing sentiment is that the company’s reckless approach to intellectual property could have long-term consequences. As one observer put it, “Short term they will probably be ok, but this kind of reckless behavior means they will probably have issues long term as a company.”
(Source: Techpowerup.com)
