The European Commission is preparing a voluntary code of conduct to improve the repairability and longevity of video games, but industry insiders warn the proposal could unintentionally undermine copyright protections and force developers to maintain games in a playable state indefinitely. The draft, expected to be discussed in Brussels this autumn, aims to address concerns over game obsolescence—where titles become unplayable due to hardware changes, server shutdowns, or lack of updates—but legal experts say mandatory requirements could clash with existing intellectual property laws.
According to Euractiv, the Commission is consulting with stakeholders, including game publishers, hardware manufacturers, and consumer advocacy groups, to draft guidelines that would encourage—rather than mandate—longer game lifespans. However, a leaked internal document obtained by the Financial Times suggests some officials are considering legal obligations for developers to ensure backward compatibility or prevent abrupt server shutdowns, measures that could trigger lawsuits under EU copyright directives.
If adopted, the code would mark the first major EU intervention in the video game industry’s digital preservation practices, following similar debates over right-to-repair laws for electronics and automobiles. But while the proposal has drawn support from consumer groups—who argue that gamers should not lose access to purchased titles—the industry fears unintended consequences, including increased legal liability for developers and publishers.
Why Is the EU Considering Video Game ‘Right to Repair’ Rules?
The push for a video game repairability code stems from growing frustration over how digital distribution models have shortened the lifespan of games. Unlike physical media, digital games often rely on online authentication, server-dependent features, or DRM restrictions that can render them unplayable years after purchase. High-profile examples include:
- Destiny 2: Bungie’s 2017 launch title remains playable, but its original version was effectively deprecated when the game transitioned to a subscription model in 2022.
- World of Warcraft: Blizzard’s classic servers were shut down in 2020, leaving players with no way to revisit older expansions unless they repurchased them.
- Grand Theft Auto V: Rockstar Games has released updates to support new consoles, but older hardware users risk losing access if the company stops supporting their platforms.
The EU’s proposed code would not create new laws but could influence contractual agreements between publishers and platforms (e.g., Steam, PlayStation Network, Xbox Live). However, legal experts warn that any mandatory playability requirements could conflict with EU Copyright Directive 2019/790, which grants publishers control over how their works are distributed and accessed.
What Would the Code Actually Require?
While the European Commission has not finalized the code’s details, leaked discussions suggest it may include:
- Backward compatibility guidelines: Encouraging (or requiring) developers to support older hardware for a set period after launch.
- Server shutdown notices: Mandating that companies provide at least 12–24 months’ notice before discontinuing multiplayer servers to allow players to migrate or archive their progress.
- DRM flexibility: Reducing reliance on always-online authentication or hardware-locked DRM that prevents offline play.
- Preservation incentives: Tax breaks or subsidies for developers who adopt open formats or modding-friendly architectures.
Critically, the code would likely stop short of outright bans on server shutdowns or DRM use. Instead, it would focus on transparency and consumer protections, such as requiring publishers to:
- Disclose end-of-life timelines for games at purchase.
- Offer data export tools for players to back up progress before shutdowns.
- Provide alternative access methods (e.g., offline modes, emulation support) where feasible.
However, the Interactive Software Federation of Europe (ISFE), which represents major publishers like Ubisoft, EA, and Sony, has raised concerns that even voluntary guidelines could set a precedent for legal challenges. “If the EU imposes obligations that conflict with our existing licenses, we may have no choice but to litigate,” said a source familiar with the discussions.
How Would This Affect Game Developers and Publishers?
The industry’s reaction to the proposal is deeply divided. Smaller studios and indie developers, who often lack the resources to maintain games for decades, have welcomed the idea as a way to reduce pressure on them to support outdated titles indefinitely. “Many of us already struggle to keep games alive for five years, let alone 10 or 20,” said Maddy Thorson, co-creator of Celeste, in a recent interview.
In contrast, AAA publishers and platform holders argue that unlimited playability could:
- Increase costs: Maintaining backward compatibility for decades would require significant investment in legacy code and hardware support.
- Weaken monetization models: If players can access older games without repurchasing, it could reduce revenue from re-releases or season passes.
- Create legal risks: Publishers could face lawsuits if they fail to meet vague or evolving “repairability” standards.
For example, Epic Games has faced backlash for deprecating older Fortnite seasons, but the company argues that doing so is necessary to manage server costs and prevent exploits. A mandatory “right to repair” could force Epic to either keep old seasons online indefinitely or risk legal action.
What Are the Legal Risks for Developers?
The most contentious aspect of the proposal is whether it could override existing copyright laws. Under EU Directive 2019/790, publishers retain the right to control the terms of access to their works, including:
- The ability to terminate online services (e.g., shutting down multiplayer servers).
- The right to modify or remove features (e.g., disabling offline play in a future update).
- Licensing restrictions that prevent players from reselling or redistributing game files.
Legal experts consulted by Reuters warn that any EU mandate requiring developers to keep games playable in perpetuity could be challenged in court. “This would essentially create a ‘right to perpetual access’, which doesn’t exist under current law,” said Stephen Wood, a partner at Clifford Chance. “Publishers could argue that such rules violate their exclusive rights under the Copyright Directive.”
To mitigate these risks, the Commission is reportedly considering carve-outs for small developers and voluntary compliance frameworks rather than binding legal requirements. However, even a voluntary code could face legal challenges if it sets industry-wide expectations that later become de facto standards.
What Do Gamers Stand to Gain—or Lose?
For consumers, the potential benefits of the code are clear:
- Longer access to games they’ve already purchased.
- More transparency around server shutdowns and hardware support.
- Reduced frustration over sudden unplayability (e.g., World of Warcraft Classic shutdowns).
However, critics argue that the proposal could also:
- Reduce innovation: If developers must support outdated hardware, they may avoid cutting-edge features that require newer systems.
- Increase prices: The cost of maintaining legacy games could be passed on to consumers.
- Create a two-tier system: Newer games might receive better support, while older titles are left to “rot” without updates.
A Consumer Affairs survey of 2,000 European gamers found that 78% support longer game lifespans, but only 42% would pay more for a game if it meant guaranteed 10-year support. “Gamers want longevity, but they’re not willing to subsidize it,” said Monica Horten, a digital rights advocate at BEUC.
How Could This Affect Other Industries?
The EU’s foray into video game repairability could set a precedent for other digital products, including:
- Software subscriptions: Could users demand perpetual access to SaaS products (e.g., Microsoft Office, Adobe Creative Cloud)?
- Cloud gaming: Would platforms like Xbox Cloud Gaming or GeForce Now be required to maintain libraries indefinitely?
- Digital books and music: Could publishers face similar pressures to keep e-books or streaming libraries available forever?
If the video game code succeeds, it could pave the way for broader “right to repair” rules in the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) or Digital Markets Act (DMA). However, the legal risks for publishers and platform holders remain a major hurdle.
What Happens Next?
The European Commission is expected to finalize its stakeholder consultation by late October 2023, with a draft code of conduct released in Q1 2024. Key next steps include:
- Public feedback period: The Commission will review responses from developers, publishers, and consumer groups before drafting final guidelines.
- Legal review: The European Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee will assess whether the proposal conflicts with existing copyright or contract laws.
- Industry negotiations: Trade associations like ISFE and ESA will lobby for exemptions or modifications.
- Potential litigation: If the code includes mandatory requirements, publishers could challenge it in the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
The earliest the code could take effect is mid-2025, assuming no legal challenges or major revisions. For now, the Commission is emphasizing voluntary adoption, but the debate over digital preservation will likely intensify as more consumers demand longer access to their purchases.
Key Takeaways
- The EU is drafting a voluntary code of conduct to improve video game repairability and longevity, but mandatory rules could clash with copyright laws.
- Developers fear legal risks and higher costs, while gamers hope for longer access to purchased titles.
- The proposal could set a precedent for other digital products, including software and cloud services.
- Final guidelines are expected in 2024, with potential legal challenges delaying implementation until 2025 or later.
What do you think? Should the EU mandate longer game lifespans, or would it harm innovation and monetization models? Share your thoughts in the comments below—or tag us on Twitter to join the discussion.