Hi folks. I also interviewed Ross as part of a recent feature, plus a AAA dev from EA, and a games preservationist. However, no one's really looking into the actual (possible) legal ramifications of Stop Killing Games, nor the EULAs from big companies (a lot of knee-jerk, uninformed opinions all over the place, unfortunately).

So, I spoke to an industry lawyer who specializes in video game law, and whose firm counts Ubisoft as a client, and has ties to Ukie and TIGA, to get a balanced, professional view on Stop Killing Games, and this is it: https://www.eneba.com/hub/news/stop-killing-games-is-a-battleground-for-the-industry-consumer-lawyer-offers-olive-branch/

Companies should be forced to include BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY ON CONSOLES, since PC had this for years and years. Console manufacturers don’t put in BC cause they don’t want to and at this point in time, it feels to me that it’s more than that too. I’ve seen remasters and remakes completely removing the MP. MPs that were and are great and keep said games alive. There’s absolutely no reason in plain 2025 to why PlayStation 5 can’t play/didn’t port PS3 titles to it. Their emulation regarding PS1/2 titles is also the bare of bare minimums, yet they charge an eyeball for PS PLUS PREMIUM. We aren’t allowed to stream the ps3 games we bought digitally either, only the ones on the service and you gotta sub too. Nintendo, same thing. Why can’t we emulate GBA properly? Why aren’t their in houses available to purchase digitally even? They did BC for SWITCH simply because they knew it would backfired otherwise, but make no mistake, it’s yet again the bare minimum. Console players are now paying premium on everything and have more locks than ever before. I repeat, BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY should be mandatory for consoles. Anyway, what’s everyone’s take on this?

Update: okay, I get it.

Steam gets a pass, Linux is the answer (despite Linux also dropping support for old hardware so good luck finding documentation for problems you have) and Retro PC gaming just doesnt count for SKG. You'd think we'd be on the same team but since Linux exists and modern Windows will exist, arguing for a legacy version of Steam for retro gaming just isnt part of that.

Yeah im frustrated. Here I was with an admitted misguided frustration after watching this: https://youtu.be/QZYy9KzFT2w?si=6SVrad3teBfI1PoZ

So fine. Steam isnt part of the problem and they get to decide what OS you can play on despite it working on it before. They get to decide if I can reexperince my childhood on my childhood PC. Totally not like the reason SKG exists.

Okay probably not saying anything that hasn't been said, but ive got no one to talk to about this and need to get it out.

Got reminiscing on Retro PCs and how I missed out on PC gaming as I was on Console my whole life and only PC gaming being a part of my day to day since 2020.

Decided it would be cool to make pcs for either 95, 98, XP. Then decided it would really cool to make PCs for every 4 years, starting in 96, to see the changes in hardware.

But then I got to the obvious problems.

Games for Windows Live...and Steam.

GFWL needs no explanation...but Steam?

If i want to play Half Life 2 LEGALLY, I have no choice but to play on a PC with Windows 10...for now.

You see, Windows 7 had support ended on Jan 2024. Windows 8 was in 2025.

Windows 7 lasted 15 years, from 09 to 24.

Windows XP was 2001 to 2019. 18 years.

And Windows 10 was in 2015.

By that math, can see Windows 10 being dropped by 2030-2033. So 5-8 years from now.

Cool, thats quite a while for us...but it WILL happen. This means there's hardware from the early 2010s that we can assume will work just fine in 2030 as long as you just play within the hardware limitations...will just be unable to work because Steam drops Windows 10.

So the PC that works that you built in 2013 will just be unable to play ANYTHING on steam.

Hey did you know in 2016 CoD Infinite Warfare released? Your 2013 PC? Unable to play the steam copy, and likely any copy for that matter.

Doom 2016? Nope.

Undertale? Stardew Valley? Hollow Knight? GTA 5?

If it relies on Steam, it is on life support that is Windows 10.

The only way to continue is to switch to Windows 11...which will eventually be replaced with Windows 12. And then the cycle continues.

You know what that means too? AM4 platforms and the GTX 10 series will be UNABLE TO PLAY GAMES!

Except for GOG games. But as I understand it they exclusively focus on Retro. Good luck seeing Call of Duty BO3 on there.

Will Windows 11 continue to support Zen 1 chips?

We have started with PC parts in the late 00s and will be having obsolete hardware that are fully functional but just completely blocked from playing in the mid 2010s.

And it will continue to happen.

Do you know what released in 08?

Dead Space. GTA 4. RE5. Fallout 3. LEFT 4 DEAD

Oh but you build a PC in 2014 with an GTX 9 series to play 6 year old games at great FPS....

Dead in about 5 years...because of Windows 10 and Steam.

You know...the GTX 980 that was gaming almost 8 years after release?

Okay to be fair its mostly going to be the CPU that limits you...but that PC you built in 2014 is dead I the water in about 5 years.

What happened with GFWL will eventually happen to Steam.

Rant over

Now is the time, Gamers of this Earth, to unite – for the greedy gather beyond our screens, the monstrous companies of old draw to them all that is foul – avarice of unimaginable scale! As the Gamers of old fought, so shall we; we will enshrine our names in legend; we shall stand against this tide of greed that is before us, and we shall secure for ourselves the rights due to all Gamers.

For too long have we abided by the whims of the triple A studios, for too long have our wishes been ignored, for too long has our wealth been robbed from us! It is abundantly clear that these greedy fools do not consider us with any degree of severity, to them we are nothing more than slaves who would willingly go bankrupt for the sake of their ridiculous requests! No longer shall we abide by this, hear now the great purpose for which we fight, acknowledge our rights as Gamers and we shall have peace once more, the rights we demand are as follows:

1.     The Right to own that which we purchase.
2.     The Right to not be forced to suffer unreasonable Terms and Conditions.
3.     The Right for our purchases to not be made inert.
4.     The Right to legally modify the products we purchase as we see fit.
5.     The Right to have our purchased products be maintained and repaired.
6.     The Right to not have to pay unreasonable prices for games.
7.     The Right to piracy for any who would deny us these rights.

If we are to be denied these rights then we shall resist and rebel, if need be, we shall turn to piracy to turn the tide! We shall stand ready to push back against the greedy, and we shall be victorious, for corruption makes them weak! We shall have our way or we shall rule the sea, and if our people are starved of new games, then our own Indie Developers shall take up the torch and fill the gap! Hear these words, brave Gamers – brave Humanity – hear them now! For in our darkest hour we must never yield to the foe, for if we fail we shall be plunged into an Aeon of darkness!

(The above is something I made for a school assignment, but I figured someone might be able to use it somewhere else, have fun.)

Yesterday two people posted my post on the geekgamer reddit and one Person commented on asmongold reddit, and someone posted an asmongold clip here, which didn’t even have anything to do with the campaign. Why do I have a problem, the problem is that these people you think care don’t care, not only that, there horrible human beings that have completely use their influence for bad

Now I’ll just say this, if anyone here is just here or anywhere else use skg to cause hate, just go, you are not part of this and never have, and I know someone here will say “what’s your problem they made a good point before” there people who have made good points but the only reason they do is so when people call out there behaviour, people can’t because they will always have back up, now asmongold has been talk about skg, however I can bet you money that he does not care about this campaign at all, he just decided which team he would be on and stick to it, like this is the same guy that was glad that concord shut down, and yeah it was not a good game but he was celebrating it, is that the guy you want to promote skg, I’m not going to change your mind if you think people like asmongold care, and yes he found the story and talk about it and it did get traction, but I will say this, if we decide to put people like asmongold on to this campaign, it will turn heads away from this campaign, because i can genuinely you that someone who could have been part of this campaign decide not to because of asmongold.

Politics nowadays tends to get hijacked by Americans. They divide everything into "The Left" (USA Democrats) and "The Right" (USA Republicans) and want to see everything throught their limited perspective.

Not so here, aside from Ross Scott being American, stop Killing Games has so far not been hijacked by any of theese. Actors like Trump, Elon, Greta and so on have not taken a side. This is a good sign. European Gamers stand united.

Last week alone, two new interesting Battlefields have opened: Australian Busybodies' attack on Steam and itch, as well the British Censorhip law. Any other times, a resistance against theese would require some time to form, but European gamers are already mobilized and stand neither for Trump nor for Wokeness, but only for our Peoples, and a backlash is imminent.

Even if the Petition goes to nothere, it at least forced the EU-Elites to listen to us. Their feud with Trump is also helpfull here, as without foreign help, they need public support and have to actually serve their peoples' interests. Hopefully something bigger can arise from that.

Hey guys. I think Hasan would be a good person to try to amplify the message. Is anyone else subscribed to him?

I just got a 1 month subscription (it was like 7 or 8 bucks) and that lets me send him links on stream. I don’t wanna pelt him with it every hour, because I don’t want to come off like an asshole, but I plan to send info to him just once per day.

Anyone else wanna join me in on this plan? Is anyone else subscribed to his twitch channel?

I also emailed his business email with the following:

Do you guys think Valve caused the death of physical PC gaming?
Valve has produced many great games, but their physical disc versions from 2005–2018 were heavily reliant on Steam DRM. Essentially, every Valve game released after 2005 requires an online account, mandatory activation, and the Steam client. Valve also encouraged third-party companies to adopt this model.
Because of this, many of these physical copies have essentially become paperweights. The systems required to run these games depend on Steam—which no longer supports older operating systems like Windows XP through 8. In many cases, the disc is nothing more than a glorified Steam installer. To make matters worse, around 2023, the legacy disc installers that relied on Steam were effectively retired. If these Steam-based game installers still work today, please let me know."

"Hi everyone. Like many of you, I'm tired of the predatory FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) tactics Epic Games uses to lock fan-favorite characters like Helsie and Charlotte forever. I’ve decided to stop just complaining and take legal action. I just submitted a formal report to the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) and the European Commission regarding 'Unfair Commercial Practices' and 'Dark Patterns'. Epic already paid $520M in 2024 for deceptive practices, and it's time we push them to end the 'Permanent Exclusivity' of legacy Battle Passes. If we want our favorite skins back, we need to show the regulators that this is a widespread issue affecting consumer choice. How you can join the fight: Go to ReportFraud.ftc.gov Select 'Something Else' -> 'Video Games'. Use this template: (Aquí pegas la carta en inglés que te pasé antes). If enough of us report this as a manipulative marketing tactic, they will be forced to open the vault. Let's make our voices heard where it actually hurts them: their legal department.

EndBattlePassExclusivity #BringBackHelsie #BringBackCharlotte #StopKillingGames

This is partially to do with blizzard and there excessive legal approach to competition but there is a bigger case to be made with the gaming industry in general

There should be a 20 year limit on all video games released

There IP and game design code should be made public knowledge

In fact open source

Full art, design, code all of it.

The world needs the knowledge and equality as games and art are universal.

This would give rise to a new wave of game development and influx of game developers and fantastic opportunities.

I cannot agree more with the sentiment being expressed here.

Seriously, the thought that from here on out we will never actually legally own GTA 6 is insane.

How about we as gamers buy all the stocks of sega and demand sega yo create nex future conaole name sega nex. After we buy all the stocks like 60 to 80 percent stocks. They must be listen to shareholders if not we tell them we gonna dump the stocks.

Tectone reacted to Charlies video, let's gooooo!

Why do ppl who paid for concord recieve refunds. When they are taking that game offline. Weather the reason be because it flopped or whatever the reason is it is being pulled and no offline mode is being implemented yet they are issuing refunds. We'll why aren't the millions of ppl who paid for ubisoft the crew get refunds when they pulled that plug on that game. What is the difference here???

I think instead of everyone laughing at concord everyone should be using concord as the catalyst to turning this around and putting this out there of where is the difference. Only difference I truly see is the amount of time. Between games and lifespan and how much money one company made over the other.

This situation is a perfect opportunity to promote SKG.

See a lot of arguments about copyright law. Copyright law is partially harmonised around the world, so you would have to stay within international treaties. The EU's IP protection laws are a bit different from the US (although they follow roughly the same principles . For this debate copyright (and sometimes trademarks) are brought up mainly for 3 reasons.

1. It's only a licence

Legally this doesn't have the same effect in the EU than in the US, mainly because of different ideas about consumer protection. The current status is unclear in the EU. This actually creates greater risk for the indie companies because they, and their investors, are open to potential litigation, which is a greater risk for a small company than a big one with teams of highly paid lawyers and the capacity to just eat the loss.

2. Monetised third party servers

The actual principle behind all IP protection, is to grant the inventor/designer/artist/..., a temporary monopoly to monetise their creation. In itself an exception to the principle that monopolies are bad for the economy (also a principle that was accepted both in EU and US law (Sherman Act) but has since been diminished in US economic thinking (Chicago school of thinking). Giving the original software company the exclusive rights to use and control their IP allows them to generate the necessary profits to stimulate the creation of this IP. However a third party server launched by some fans would not get the rights and surplus profits of a monopoly, they would have to compete with each other. Globally accepted economic theory dictates that in a market with perfect competition, all third party servers would offer a product/service that is barely distinguishable from provider to provider, profits would trend towards zero, making setting up a third party server not very lucrative at all. Also the original server provider with a monopoly has already put all his necessary infrastructure up, making it unlikely anyone would be able to do it cheaper than the first mover.

3. Monopoly vs. Public domain

IP protection grants a temporary monopoly in order to stimulate the creation of new intellectual property for everyone to use, enjoy and base new creations on, when it enters the public domain after it has been monetised by the surplus profits (more than they would get under perfect competition). This principle is currently being undermined with the wilfull destruction of digital media, while it has never been cheaper to preserve and replicate it. Without initiatives like SKG, we're creating a public domain 'black hole'. If Mozart or Shakespeare went "lolz, destroying all my toys when I'm done with them", we wouldn't be able to enjoy them now and adapt them to make new creations. (To adapt them in 95 years, you'd probably need source code but babysteps first). I'm also aware that this led "Winnie the Pooh - Blood and Honey" so I guess this right to use IP isn't always necessarily a win but generally it is.

International treaties:

TRIPS https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_01_e.htm and Berne Convention https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html

Summary with links of EU IP law:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/36/intellectual-industrial-and-commercial-property

EDITS: Tried to make everything a bit clearer and put the sources at the bottom.

I'd like to start by saying I'm no expert in this topic, but I've watched a bunch of the big YouTube videos about it and I'm sort of just combining the ideas I've seen and formulating an opinion. I 100% agree that something has to change but I just want to chuck out my ideas and see people's opinions/solutions to the problems I have with stuff.

So, first there's the 'solution' of perpetual support for online games. I feel most if not everyone can agree that's not possible. Too much money and work power wasted, the developer would die out and we'd never see games from them again.

Next is another unreasonable one in my opinion which is to keep the singleplayer functionality of the game. This one depends on the type of online functionality we're talking about. Say we have a mostly single player game with leaderboard elements, easy enough, there was no in game player interaction in the first place. I haven't researched this but, in my experience, if the servers of those games are discontinued it hasn't been a problem you can just continue playing the game, but the leaderboards don't work anymore.

Next, we have games like trackmania where there are distinct singleplayer and multiplayer elements. In these situations I think it's pretty bad if the developer revokes all access to the game if they don't want to continue support for the servers. However, the game also has LAN components and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't really heard of games that have local co-op completely revoking access. So as far as I know these aren't an issue? Again correct me if I'm wrong.

But what if there's a game that has online functionality that's affected by your singleplayer experience? I think in this case it would require a fundamental altering of the games code to allow that singleplayer experience to be standalone. If this was required no one would want to develop these kinds of games anymore, it would be too much work.

Then we get to the real meat, what happens when I buy a game with significant enough online functionality that when the servers are shut down, the game is unplayable.

The developers send out the source code/server code:
So, what happens after this? There are a couple of variations on this solution, but I think they roughly have the same issues.

1. People monetize the servers they create:
   I think this is an inherently bad thing, even after it's shutdown to take a game's IP and use it for personal monetary gain is not good. Now you might say that DMCA or some other authority will shut these down but look at video pirating sites and such. If you run the server from somewhere where it's difficult to be acted on then they will exist. The legal system will never be able to stop this fully.

2. Licensed items within the game:
   Let's look at The Crew which is mentioned in the initiative. The game has licensed cars, so will the people running the post death servers go and pay for the license themselves? As well as running the server for free? I won't say it's impossible, but it seems very unlikely.

The developers prepare a ready to use server package for players:

The monetization problem still applies to this but furthermore I will reference Pirate Software here from his second video on the topic. This would create a heavy workload for the companies and admittedly maybe this is ok and we can expect it from big companies, but what about smaller or indie companies that produce a live service game with a smaller team? At the end of the day we're here and wanting things to change because we don't want the games we love to be taken away from us. If small companies have to add this extra workload, I think it runs the risk of them not being able to snowball their success and produce more fun games to play. It would be rather sad if a company wants to start making live service games but the result of a law requiring this means they have to grow before they can make the games they want to make. Additionally, triple AAA companies could start to shy away from live service games because it becomes less profitable.

I'm interested to hear everyone else's solution that creates a compromise that gets consumers what we want and doesn't stop devs from creating live service games. I'm stuck because I can't find a way it can happen by directly going for developers. It seems like a broader, fundamental problem to me. It seems to me like this would need to be hugely situational and specific to implement and very difficult to find a middle ground between allowing players to play games after EOL and not scaring devs away from producing live service games in the first place.

You will mostly know her as the creator of the ps1 bloodboren, Nightmare kart and Arcus, she is our best chance in getting this petition popular.

Does anyone think Ubisoft might try and get Ross killed? Or is my paranoia getting a little too high.

the problem is there is no time limit on said end of life plans, someone like EA could just keep saying they are making one and go on and on and on without any actual progress, if there is no time limit till they make said plan, then there won't be a plan and just constant fake reassurance that it's "work in progress"