Protect Our Games Act: Difference between revisions
m styl. |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''' | '''Protect Our Games Act''' or '''POG Act''' is a proposed{{clarify|proposed or passed}} California law, AB1921,<ref>{{Cite_web |author=LegiScan, Chris Ward |title=CA AB1921 2025-2026 Regular Session |url=https://legiscan.com/CA/bill/AB1921/2025 |website=LegiScan |date=12 February 2026 |url-status=live}}</ref> introduced by Chris Ward and backed by [[Stop Killing Games]], that aims to establish consumer protections for purchases of video games with functionalities that depends on online services. The bill would be added to the California Business and Professions Code and would apply to digital games that are made available for purchase starting from 1st January 2027. | ||
On 14 May 2026 the bill passed with 11 Ayes, 2 Nays and 2 Absent votes.<ref name="vote">{{ | On 14 May 2026 the bill passed with 11 Ayes, 2 Nays and 2 Absent votes.<ref name="vote">{{Cite web |author= |title=Vote Results |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVotesClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1921 |website=LegiScan |date=14 May 2026 |access-date=19 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/hwls6 |archive-date=20 May 2026}}</ref> | ||
==Definitions== | ==Definitions== | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
*Games that are permanently downloadable for offline use and without revocable access. | *Games that are permanently downloadable for offline use and without revocable access. | ||
==Industry | ==Industry response== | ||
{{Main|ESA comment on Protect Our Games Act}} | {{Main|ESA comment on Protect Our Games Act}} | ||
The [[Entertainment Software Association]] filed a comment against the bill<ref>{{Cite_web |author=Stop Killing Games |title=The Industry is lobbying against Stop Killing Games! (again) |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/StopKillingGames/comments/1t9ne7c/the_industry_is_lobbying_against_stop_killing/ |website=Reddit |date=11 May 2026 |url-status=live }}</ref>. | The [[Entertainment Software Association]] filed a comment against the bill<ref>{{Cite_web |author=Stop Killing Games |title=The Industry is lobbying against Stop Killing Games! (again) |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/StopKillingGames/comments/1t9ne7c/the_industry_is_lobbying_against_stop_killing/ |website=Reddit |date=11 May 2026 |url-status=live }}</ref>. | ||
==Result== | ==Result== | ||
On 14 May 2026 the bill passed with 11 Ayes, 2 Nays and 2 Absent votes.<ref name="vote"/> | On 14 May 2026 the bill passed with 11 Ayes, 2 Nays and 2 Absent votes.<ref name="vote" /> | ||
==See | ==See also== | ||
*[[Stop Killing Games]] | *[[Stop Killing Games]] | ||
*[[Video game preservation]] | *[[Video game preservation]] | ||
Latest revision as of 03:33, 20 May 2026
Protect Our Games Act or POG Act is a proposed[proposed or passed?] California law, AB1921,[1] introduced by Chris Ward and backed by Stop Killing Games, that aims to establish consumer protections for purchases of video games with functionalities that depends on online services. The bill would be added to the California Business and Professions Code and would apply to digital games that are made available for purchase starting from 1st January 2027.
On 14 May 2026 the bill passed with 11 Ayes, 2 Nays and 2 Absent votes.[2]
Definitions
[edit | edit source]- Video games are defined as any digital game accessed through any gaming device, computer, mobile device or similar hardware capable of running the game and includes any extra downloadable content DLCs or add-ons.
- The bill defines a game studio developer, publisher or entity controlling the purchasers as "operator". The operator has control over authentication systems, DRMs, server access, updates, etc.
- The bill defines the "ordinary use" as the ability to use the game's core features with reasonable consumer expectations at the time of purchase.
Consumer notice requirements
[edit | edit source]At least 60 days before ending service, the operator would be required to:
- Notify purchasers directly through the game.
- Post a public notice on the operator website.
The notice has to include:
- Shutdown date.
- The services that are being terminated.
- The features that will become unavailable.
- The security risks that are associated with the shutdown.
- Information for the players on how they may continue using the game or obtain a refund.
Post shutdown obligations
[edit | edit source]On the date of the shutdown, the publisher would be required to provide one of the following:
- A version of the game playable without operator-controlled services.
- A patch or update for continued independent use without the operator.
- A full refund equal to the game's purchase price.
- The operator is prohibited from continuing to distribute versions of the game that cannot function independently.
Exceptions
[edit | edit source]The legislation would not apply to:
- Subscription based games where your game access has a clearly defined expiring date tied to your subscription period.
- Free to play games without monetary involvements.
- Games that are permanently downloadable for offline use and without revocable access.
Industry response
[edit | edit source]- Main article: ESA comment on Protect Our Games Act
The Entertainment Software Association filed a comment against the bill[3].
Result
[edit | edit source]On 14 May 2026 the bill passed with 11 Ayes, 2 Nays and 2 Absent votes.[2]
See also
[edit | edit source]References
[edit | edit source]- ↑ LegiScan, Chris Ward (12 February 2026). "CA AB1921 2025-2026 Regular Session". LegiScan.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ↑ 2.0 2.1 "Vote Results". LegiScan. 14 May 2026. Archived from the original on 20 May 2026. Retrieved 19 May 2026.
- ↑ Stop Killing Games (11 May 2026). "The Industry is lobbying against Stop Killing Games! (again)". Reddit.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)