California Bill Would Force Game Publishers to Patch or Refund

Key Takeaways

• California's Protect Our Games Act passed committee 11-2 and heads to a full Assembly vote
• Publishers would need to refund players or provide patches enabling offline play when shutting down games
• The law would apply to games sold in California on or after January 1, 2027

California is one step closer to passing a law that could reshape how game publishers handle server shutdowns. The Protect Our Games Act cleared the state Assembly's appropriations committee this week with an 11-2 vote, advancing to a full floor vote.

If passed, the bill would give players two options when publishers cut off support for an online game: a full refund, or an updated version of the game that works without the publisher's servers.

What the Bill Requires

The Protect Our Games Act, introduced by Assemblyman Chris Ward, targets the common practice of publishers shutting down game servers with little warning. Under the current version, publishers would need to notify players 60 days before ending services necessary for the ordinary use of a digital game.

The bill offers publishers a choice. They can issue full refunds to affected players. Or they can release an update that enables continued use independent of services controlled by the operator. That second option effectively means providing tools for players to run their own servers or converting games to work offline.

Some games would be exempt. Completely free games would not be covered. Neither would games offered solely for the duration of a subscription. Any other game sold in California on or after January 1, 2027, would fall under the law.

Stop Killing Games Scores a Win

The committee vote marks a significant victory for Stop Killing Games, the UK-based advocacy group that formed after Ubisoft shut down The Crew in 2024. That shutdown, which rendered a game players had purchased completely unplayable, sparked the grassroots preservation movement.

SKG worked directly on the California legislation. The group says it advised on the drafting of the bill before Ward introduced it earlier this year.

“Back shortly before Christmas, when I flew to the US to help set up SKG-US, I didn't expect us to get this far this quickly. It has been an honor to take part in drafting this bill on behalf of the SKG community: gamers, developers, and publishers alike.”

— Monitz Katzner, Stop Killing Games, on Reddit

In its formal support statement to the California legislature, SKG framed the issue in consumer rights terms. There is no other medium in which a product can be marketed and sold to a consumer and then ripped away without notice, the group wrote. As live service games rise in popularity, end-of-life procedures become essential tools to ensure prolonged access.

Industry Opposition

The Entertainment Software Association, the trade group representing major publishers, opposes the bill. The ESA told the California Assembly last month that the legislation misrepresents how modern game distribution works.

The core of the ESA's argument centers on licensing. Consumers receive a license to access and use a game, not an unrestricted ownership interest in the underlying work, the group wrote. From this perspective, shutting down outdated or obsolete games is a natural feature of modern software, especially when that software requires ongoing infrastructure maintenance.

The ESA also raised concerns about unreasonable expectations the bill would place on publishers. Releasing server code or creating offline versions of games designed around online infrastructure can require significant engineering work. For some games, it may not be technically feasible without a complete rebuild.

What Happens Next

The bill now moves to the full California Assembly for a floor vote. If it passes there, it would proceed to the state Senate before reaching the governor's desk.

Even if California passes the law, its practical impact could extend beyond state borders. Publishers selling games to California's 39 million residents might find it simpler to apply preservation standards nationwide rather than maintaining separate policies for different states.

The January 1, 2027 effective date gives publishers time to adjust. Games already on sale before that date would not be retroactively covered. But any new release or existing game that continues selling after that date would need to comply.

The Bigger Picture

This California bill is part of a broader push for game preservation rights. Stop Killing Games has also pursued action through the European Parliament, holding hearings and press events to build support for similar measures in the EU.

The debate touches on fundamental questions about digital ownership. When you buy a physical book, you can read it forever. When you buy a digital game that requires server connections, you're renting access until the publisher decides to stop maintaining it.

Publishers argue this is the nature of modern software. Advocates argue that if something is sold, not explicitly rented, buyers deserve either lasting access or their money back.

Frequently Asked Questions

When would California's game preservation law take effect?

If passed, the Protect Our Games Act would apply to games sold in California on or after January 1, 2027.

What games would be exempt from the California bill?

Completely free games and games offered solely for the duration of a subscription would be exempt from the requirements.

What options would publishers have under the Protect Our Games Act?

Publishers shutting down online games would need to either provide full refunds to players or release an updated version enabling continued play without publisher-controlled servers.

What is Stop Killing Games?

Stop Killing Games is a UK-based player advocacy group formed after Ubisoft shut down The Crew in 2024. The group advocates for game preservation laws and helped draft the California bill.

Why does the ESA oppose the California game bill?

The Entertainment Software Association argues that players receive licenses to access games, not ownership, and that server shutdowns are a natural feature of modern software requiring ongoing infrastructure.

Source: Hacker News: Best