A UK government petition demanding changes to consumer law around the sale of video games has passed 100,000 signatures. This milestone triggers consideration for a debate in Parliament and throws the spotlight on a growing international issue.
The petition calls for a change in the law to prevent publishers from disabling or removing access to games after they have been sold, unless consumers are given the right to retain or repair them.
It is part of the wider Stop Killing Games campaign, a grassroots consumer movement gaining traction globally. Alongside the UK petition, a European Citizens' Initiative has also surpassed the required one million signatures, meaning it will now be formally reviewed by the European Commission (subject to verification) and brought before the European Parliament for a public hearing.
The end of traditional game ownership?
The movement stems from a deeper shift in the way video games are sold and controlled.
In the past, games were purchased on physical media like cartridges or discs, and once a copy was bought, it was owned outright. As long as a player had the disc and a compatible console or PC, they could play the game indefinitely.
Today, most games are distributed digitally and bought through online storefronts. This change means consumers are often not buying the game itself, but rather a license to access it. That license can be revoked at any time (subject to its terms), making the concept of ownership much less certain.
One case that brought this issue into sharp focus was the shutdown of The Crew, a popular racing game published by Ubisoft. The game was delisted from Ubisoft's store in December 2023, and in March 2024, its servers were shut down permanently. Players who had purchased the game, even years earlier, discovered they could no longer access or play it. It was wiped from their digital libraries.
Legal fallout in the U.S.
In response, a class action lawsuit was filed against Ubisoft in California in November 2024. The plaintiffs' lawyers in the suit described Ubisoft's actions with a striking analogy: imagine a company sold you a pinball machine, then returned years later to break into your home and rip out its core components, permanently disabling it.
Ubisoft is currently defending the case, arguing that consumers were never sold the game in the traditional sense. Instead, Ubisoft's argument is that consumers were aware they had only been given a limited license that came with no guarantee of continued access.
This controversy prompted California lawmakers to take action. Assembly Bill 2426 amended the state's false advertising law to require clearer communication from digital content sellers. From now on, businesses must tell customers when they are purchasing a license rather than full ownership of a product.
The UK Government's stance
The UK government responded to the petition on 3 February 2025, before it hit the debate threshold. At the time, it stated that there were no plans to change consumer law in this area. It cited existing protections under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, the latter of which has now been restated and updated in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
As an example, the Government noted that if a game is marketed prior to purchase as remaining playable indefinitely, even after physical support is withdrawn, current consumer protection law might require that promise to be upheld. Offline play could potentially be mandated in such a case.
In the meantime, the Government has said it will monitor developments closely, particularly in relation to the work of the Competition and Markets Authority.
Looking ahead
Whether the UK Government's stance will shift in response to European developments and in particular the European Citizens' Initiative mentioned above, remains uncertain. However, given that much of UK consumer protection law has its roots in EU legislation, the EU could ultimately adopt a similar approach to the UK in its own response to Stop Killing Games. That is to say, protections are already in place.
For now, with the issue firmly back in the spotlight, game publishers and online marketplaces are likely to face renewed scrutiny. Clear and accurate marketing around future access to video games is no longer just good practice. It is becoming a legal necessity.
Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.
