1. Proprietary software / non-free
2. ...is in beta-testing (and thus #3)
3. not an official/stable release
4. ...that is designed/targeted for Ubuntu (not linux in general)
5. is pretty much useless to a very substantial number of Arch users (being as it is restrictive due to being pay to play, proprietary software)
6. has significant DRM
7. that says right in it's license (regardless of what valve employees may have said) that what they (archers) are doing (re-packaging/modifying it) violates Valve's license. (but hey, if Valve wants to re-write their license to allow this - then sure... but an email or two saying it is okay, imho does not invalidate the language used by Valve, in their license.)
if you can find me any other software in the Arch repos that falls into ALL of these categories, then i will retract my statements.
regardless, imho this is setting a new precedence as to what can be put in the Archlinux repos. ie: any alpha/beta-quality, heavy DRM, pay/non-free software should all be available in the official repos, without exception - regardless of legality.