Additional information (May 8): Another response has arrived. MEP Tonino Picula from the SPD sent us his response which you can see below. As always, I am sharing it in full.
Additional information (May 6): A second response has arrived via email from the EU Parliament. Gordan Bosanac, a representative of the Možemo! party, sent us his response. We are sharing it in full at the bottom. They will be arranged as they come.
Original news (April 30): Two weeks ago, I wrote about how the Stop Killing Games initiative reached the European Parliament. In that text, I mentioned that I sent an inquiry about opinions to the email addresses of all 12 of our representatives. I must admit that I lost hope of receiving a response, at least before I resend the inquiry on Monday. I will indeed send that inquiry on Monday, but to one address less.
SDP's Marko Vešligaj has thus become the first to respond to the question posed, and I am sharing his response in full. I hope to add more responses to this text. That is, I hope more representatives will show interest in the topic. Here is his response:
I support the Stop Killing Games initiative, or the European Citizens' Initiative Stop Destroying Videogames, as it raises an important question about consumer rights in the digital age. When a citizen purchases a digital product, especially a video game, they should not suddenly be left without a functional product just because the publisher decided to shut down support or servers. This is not just a gaming issue, but a broader question of ownership, transparency, consumer rights, and the preservation of digital culture. Of course, we must also consider intellectual property, security, and real technical possibilities, but the basic principle must be clear: the consumer must know what they are buying and under what conditions that product may cease to be available.
I am glad that the initiative has reached this level of European discussion. After the public hearing in the European Parliament, which took place on April 16 before the IMCO, JURI, and PETI committees, we expect a plenary discussion on this topic in May in Strasbourg.
I will follow the further course of the discussion and support solutions that strengthen consumer rights, transparency in the digital market, and fair treatment of users.
The digital economy must be innovative, but also fair. That is the minimum that citizens rightfully expect.
Gordan Bosanac:
I have been following the “Stop destroying videogames” initiative, at the invitation of citizens, since the year before last when it was in the signature collection phase. I must immediately say that I support it and hope that the European Parliament will also support it at the plenary session because 1.3 million European signatures, of which nearly 15 thousand are from Croatian citizens – obliges us representatives to listen and act.
The idea that after five years the publisher shuts down the server for a video game to prevent users from playing is, in my opinion, a clear example of “planned obsolescence,” or an unfair business practice where technological products are marketed with a clear idea of a lifespan, intentionally shortening their life to ensure that consumers return to the market for the same or a similar replacement version of the product after it expires. Recently, Directive 2024/825 came into effect, which takes the first steps in the fight of EU institutions against this practice, so soon technology companies will have to indicate if a “software update” for our mobile phone shortens (and by how much) its battery health, or provide detailed instructions on how to repair the device.
The same rules are a bit harder to apply to video games since it is not about purchasing hardware, but software, but the rule is the same – the buyer expects to have unlimited access to the service as it was for decades before, on consoles of all generations. Regardless of the fact that the video game, with its graphics, sound, and gameplay, is still the intellectual property of its publisher, if they really want to maintain the shutdown model, then they must clearly and visibly communicate to consumers before purchase – “you are not buying a video game, but the right to play for 5 years.”
Tonino Picula:
The initiative you are interested in is not under the jurisdiction of the parliamentary committees of the European Parliament in which I participate (foreign affairs and security and defense).
For this reason, I do not have all the information related to this initiative, but I believe that the initiative is important in terms of consumer protection and valid arguments have been presented, as it is not fair for the consumer to lose the ability to use a video game after some time.
Certainly, the number of signatures from our citizens for the initiative, which exceeds 14,000, is not negligible and should be taken into account.
I will follow the communication from the Commission expected next month, which I hope will be in the interest of our citizens, i.e., users.
Note: The article was originally published on 227gaming.com, and we are republishing it in full on our portal with the author's permission.
