California Advances Law Against "Killing" Online Games — What Awaits Us
Do you remember Ubisoft's The Crew? In 2024, Ubisoft simply shut down the game's servers, and thousands of people who had bought it suddenly found themselves with nothing. A game for which they had paid real money became an inaccessible file on their hard drive. This incident specifically sparked a movement that, two years later, is on the verge of changing the rules for the industry.
The California bill Assembly Bill 1921 (AB 1921) — also known as the "Protect Our Games Act" — has just overcome a major hurdle in the legislative process. The California Congress's Appropriations Committee voted "yes" with a convincing 11 to 2, opening the way for it to become actual law.
What does AB 1921 stipulate?
The bill was drafted by Christopher Ward, a member of the California Assembly for the 78th district. The idea is simple but potentially revolutionary for the gaming industry.
According to the current draft, if a publisher decides to shut down the servers of a paid online game, they must do one of the following:
- Provide a playable offline version — for example, through an update that removes server dependency
- Allow for community servers — a framework that allows players to keep the game alive themselves
- Refund every buyer if the above options are not possible
Additionally, the publisher must warn users at least 60 days before the shutdown and cease sales during that period. There are logical exceptions — free games, subscription services, and similar models — but for any paid online game, the rules become mandatory.
Why this is big news
In modern times, we buy everything digitally — games, music, movies, software. But there's a small catch that most people don't read in the fine print: you're not buying a product, you're buying a license. The publisher can revoke it at any time. You bought The Crew for $60? Great, until Ubisoft decided the servers were no longer profitable.
The statistics used by the Stop Killing Games movement are telling: over 93% of 400 surveyed games that were discontinued remain unusable. This isn't about isolated cases — it's about a systematic problem.
The California law is important not just because of California itself. It is home to a large part of the gaming industry, and historically, its laws often become de facto industry standards. Companies rarely create separate versions for each jurisdiction — it's easier to apply the strictest rule universally. This means that if AB 1921 becomes law, the effect will be global.
Who supports and who opposes
The Stop Killing Games movement, founded by YouTuber Ross Scott after The Crew incident, is an active supporter of the bill. Currently, the organization is conducting legal campaigns in California, France (where they are suing Ubisoft), the United Kingdom, and the European Union.
In Europe, the parallel initiative is called "Stop Destroying Videogames" — the name was changed by Scott to avoid association with the topic of violence in games. It reached the necessary signatures for discussion in the European Parliament.
On the other side of the fence is the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) — the large trade association representing the interests of publishers like EA, Activision Blizzard, Take-Two, and others. Their position: the bill will "stifle innovation" and lead to fewer new games.
Criticism of this position was swift. Proponents of the law point out that the industry is not being asked to maintain servers indefinitely — only to provide a reasonable exit at the end of the life cycle. This could be an offline update, tools for community servers, or a refund.
What's next
Overcoming the Appropriations Committee is an important step, but the road is still long. The bill now goes for a vote in the full California Assembly. After that, it moves to the State Senate. And finally — a signature from Governor Gavin Newsom.
If all goes smoothly, AB 1921 could come into effect in 2027. That sounds far off, but for a legislative process of this scale, it's actually a fast pace.
What this means for Bulgarian gamers
Even if Bulgaria is far from California, the effect will be felt here too — at least indirectly. If the law passes, major publishers will have to adapt their processes globally or risk exclusion from the Californian market, which is too large to miss.
In practical terms, if you are among those who:
- Still have active accounts in old MMO games
- Primarily buy online-only titles (live service games)
- Own digital copies of games with always-on DRM
… this law is good news for you. It doesn't mean your favorite games will live forever — but it means greater transparency and fewer "surprises" at the end of their life cycle.
There is also a downside that deserves attention. Some developers — especially indie studios with multiplayer social games — claim that the requirement for an offline mode is technically and financially unfeasible for certain types of games. This is a valid argument that will find its place in the debates in the coming months.
The bigger picture
What we are seeing is actually a broader trend towards rethinking digital ownership. In 2024, California already passed a related law — AB 2426 — which requires digital stores not to use the words "buy" and "acquire" if they are actually selling a license that can be revoked.
One by one, legislators around the world are starting to ask the uncomfortable question: if something can be taken away from you without compensation, have you really bought it? Publishers will have less and less freedom to answer with "yes, those are the rules" in the fine print.
In short
AB 1921 is one of the most serious legislative initiatives to protect consumers' digital ownership to date. Overcoming the Appropriations Committee is a real step forward, not just symbolic. Whether it will become law in 2027 — we shall see. But even if it doesn't succeed in its current form, the conversation has already begun, and the industry will not be able to avoid it.
For gamers who buy a lot of digital content, this trend could lead to greater investment security. For publishers — to more accountability. And for both sides, it's good long-term news.
Source: This article is based on a report by Playfront.de, with additional information from the official text of AB 1921 (Calmatters/California Legislature), the Stop Killing Games movement, and analytical materials from Dexerto and Eurogamer.
What is AB 1921 and who proposed it? AB 1921, also known as the "Protect Our Games Act," is a California bill proposed by Christopher Ward, a member of the State Assembly. Its goal is to protect buyers of online games when servers are shut down.
When could this law come into effect? If it passes the full Assembly, the Senate, and is signed by the governor, AB 1921 could come into effect in 2027.
What will publishers have to do according to the law? Publishers will have to warn consumers 60 days before server shutdown and offer an offline version, a framework for community servers, or a full refund.
Does this law affect Bulgaria? Directly — no. But since major publishers rarely maintain separate versions for each region, the effect of the law will likely be felt globally, including in Bulgaria.
What is Stop Killing Games? Stop Killing Games is an international movement for the protection of video game consumer rights, founded in 2024 by YouTuber Ross Scott after Ubisoft shut down The Crew's servers.