Well then the mods should learn to deal with people asking questions and not being sheep....... :)

From what I've seen, the Steam forums are a long way from such liberties.

If Valve went out of business (which is about the only way I see them relinquishing their grasp on Steam) then I doubt a comment posted in their forums about the benefits of Steam would be held against them. Especially considering the fact that most companies talk up the benefits of their products, even when that wouldn't exist if the company went under / abandoned the product.

I was referring more to an official statement from Gabe saying "yes if Steam ever has to close down then every game purchased through the service will have it's DRM removed." You wont ever see this.

i don't think Kotick will allow that.

The only way it would even be possible is if they kept hold of all the pre-Steam executables. Which isn't impossible, I suppose. But whatever the case it doesn't look to me like Steam is going anywhere.

Actually DRM is one thing that Activision haven't been completely overkill about. Certainly not compared to Ubisoft or EA. They're more focussed on minimal content at maximum price.

Yup. Their ToS actually says the opposite, that they are under no obligation to make your games playable tomorrow, let alone in the event of shutdown. I bet they mean Steamworks games only too, I doubt they have the authority to take DRM out of all the others.
I wasn't aware my DRM topic was moved to off-topic... how is it not a Steam issue to link games on Steam with additional DRM? I am so freaking done with that forum.

I don't really view it as a big deal. There are already ways to get around the Steam DRM, so why can't people just use those when Steam dies?

Well... that's the plan.
Still, it's a principle thing. There are ways around Ubisoft DRM and people complain about that pretty vehemently. I don't like asking a publisher if I can please play the game I bought, and I fear a future where we have no control over our purchases at all and everything is cloud-based or what-have-you, and internet regulations remove alternatives. So I try and spread the word that our consumer rights are eroding.

You'll never see an official statement like that because in the event of a bankruptcy proceeding, Valve won't get to decide what's done. A court officer will have to okay every decision regarding Steam, including DRM. And since that court's primary goal is to maximize profits while trying to sell assets, it's entirely plausible to see that officer saying "Nope, we aren't going to let you remove Steam requirements as that reduces the value of the platform."

Looks pretty much like a no-brainer for me, that Gabe is referring to Steam as a form of DRM here - that will get removed. Of course nobody at Valve has any influence over other companies additional DRM measures.
No, consumer rights aren't eroding, they get dragged through the dirt before they'll completely ignore them. This however, is not only a Steam problem - about 95% of the gaming industry shows that attitude.
And frankly speaking.... spreading the word will do as much as venting on a board, signing an online petition or joining a Facebook group - nothing.

Just make a statement by not buying any of those products ridden with DRM like Steamworks, and let it be known. If the first mafia for example appears here I'll buy it immediately, and i won't buy the new mafia with steamworks, for example.

Actually if you agree to an EULA then you have no consumer rights, have you read them lately? The very fact we have to agree to never loan, sell on or alter the software we buy is bad enough but you have to agree to it AFTER you buy it. If you buy a PC game from a retail store for 50 bucks, take it home and decide you don't agree to the EULA then you are still down 50 bucks as you can't get a refund as the product is not faulty. The fact publishers are allowed by law to get away with this is by definition criminal so the more people complain the better. They are only allowed to abuse us because when it comes to the average MP or Congressman games are lower on the agenda than Mint flavoured KitKat.

Debatable. It could go either way seeing as EULAs go far too far towards infringing on consumer rights. It's a grey area, legally. To throw them out as legally irrelevant would cause as much damage as to say they are legally binding. Subsequently it's an issue few would dare touch.
Substantial violation of the terms might be pursued through the courts, but otherwise they might as well remain as ignored as they are.

Actually in some of the cases where EULAs have been tested in court the ability to return the product if one disagreed with the EULA was deemed critical to whether or not the EULA was enforceable. Additionally, in practice, if you try to return the product and they refuse to issue a refund then you can always contest the charge with the credit card company and let them duke it out with the retailer.