California Protect Our Games Act Passes Committee

California Protect Our Games Act Clears Committee, Moves Toward Floor Vote

The California Protect Our Games Act has passed out of the state assembly's appropriations committee with an 11-2 vote, setting the stage for a full floor vote by the California Assembly. It's a major win. So the advancement marks a major win for the Stop Killing Games grassroots preservation movement, which has pushed for legal protections against publishers shutting down online games without recourse for players.

It's a long road. The bill's progress comes over the loud objections of the Entertainment Software Association, the trade group representing major game publishers, and that lobbying effort failed to stop the committee vote. But the act must secure majority passage in both the full Assembly and the California Senate before landing on Governor Newsom's desk for signature.

What the Protect Our Games Act Would Do

Publishers cut off game support. As it's currently written, the California Protect Our Games Act targets that exact problem, leaving players unable to access what they paid for when publishers kill online games. Under the bill, they've got two options. But they could provide a full refund to every affected player, or they could release an updated version of the game that enables its continued use independent of services controlled by the operator.

It's a notification requirement. So publishers have to inform players 60 days before shutting down the services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game, giving people time to finish their playthrough or seek a refund before it's unplayable.

The current version's got exceptions. Completely free games are exempt. So are games offered solely for the duration of a subscription, and any other game sold in California on or after January 1, 2027, would fall under the law if it passes.

Key Provisions at a Glance

• Publishers must offer a full refund or a self-sufficient version of the game when online support ends.
• Players must receive 60 days notice before service shutdown.
• Free games and subscription-only games are not covered.
• The law would apply to games sold in California starting January 1, 2027.

The Battle Between Stop Killing Games and the ESA

It formed in the UK. That was after Ubisoft shut down The Crew in 2024. So last month the group wrote that it advised on drafting the California bill before Assemblyman Chris Ward introduced it earlier this year, and they're proud of that. After the committee vote, SKG's Monitz Katzner posted on Reddit that shortly before Christmas when he flew to the US to help set up SKG-US, he didn't expect them to get this far this quickly. He added that it's an honor to help draft the bill on behalf of gamers, developers, and publishers alike.

SKG sent a formal statement of support to the California legislature, arguing that no other medium allows a company to market and sell a product to a consumer and then rip it away without notice. They can't do that. But as live service games grow in popularity, the group said end-of-life procedures are critical tools to ensure people can keep playing the games they've paid for over a longer period of time.

The ESA sees it differently. So the group told California Assembly last month the bill misrepresents modern game distribution, adding that consumers receive a license to access and use a game, not an unrestricted ownership interest in the underlying work, and they called the eventual shutdown of outdated or obsolete games "a natural feature of modern software," especially when it's dependent on online infrastructure maintenance.

But that framing misses something. The ESA also raised concerns about licensing rights. Music and intellectual property rights for games are often negotiated on a time-limited basis. "A legal requirement to keep games playable indefinitely could place publishers in an impossible position," the group wrote, "forcing them to renegotiate licenses indefinitely or alter games in ways that may not be legally or technically feasible."

"A legal requirement to keep games playable indefinitely could place publishers in an impossible position, forcing them to renegotiate licenses indefinitely or alter games in ways that may not be legally or technically feasible." , Entertainment Software Association

What Happens Next for the Bill

The California Protect Our Games Act already passed positive votes in two other committees last month: the Privacy and Consumer Protection committee and the Judiciary committee. This week's appropriations committee vote is the third such green light. But the hardest parts are ahead.

Political math's uncertain. The full California Assembly must vote on bill, if it passes it moves to California Senate, only after both chambers approve can it reach Governor Newsom, though whole process could take months. And industry lobbyists still fight, but the ESA's got deep pockets.

A Contrast with the UK Situation

California's momentum stands in contrast to the Stop Killing Games movement's experience in its home country, where the group has seen its momentum in the UK "stall a bit" after a UK Parliament debate on game preservation last November. No bill has advanced. But the California Protect Our Games Act has, so it's a potential bellwether for similar legislation in other states or countries.

Months ago, it seemed unlikely. But for now grassroots coalition's celebrating committee victory, floor vote is next, and if bill clears, fight moves to Senate, then to governor where real debate over future of online game preservation will truly begin.