It’s amazing what a difference a little bit of time can make: Two years after kicking off what looked to be a long-shot campaign to push back on the practice of shutting down server-dependent videogames once they’re no longer profitable, Stop Killing Games founder Ross Scott and organizer Moritz Katzner appeared in front of the European Parliament to present their case—and it seemed to go very well.

Official Stream: https://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/webstreaming/committee-on-internal-market-and-consumer-protection-ordinary-meeting-committee-on-legal-affairs-com_20260416-1100-COMMITTEE-IMCO-JURI-PETI

Digital Fairness Act: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14622-Digital-Fairness-Act/F33096034_en

  • Axolotl@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    If ypu can make a multiplayer game over the internet, you can make a multiplayer LAN mode or even share the server implementation or give API specifications to allow the community to make their server software

    • stickyprimer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Yeah I think there’s some promise in “open the source” as a remedy here. Because that doesn’t really put any onus on the game maker. They can keep making games exactly as they do now, but if they want to utterly walk away from a title, they have to open the source.

      I think the complications with this would come from IP and copyright law, licensing, etc. for example, if the developer licensed any other software (or music or whatever) in order to make the game, do they actually have the rights to open source all of that? Perhaps not.

      It’s kind of like accelerating the public domain thing. Very interesting remedy for this situation, but extremely complex legally, I would guess.

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        The music/artwork thing is usually not a problem since the license can just not cover art like many open source licenses already do

        • stickyprimer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          But then how could anyone use it? If it’s to download and run at home, you can get away with it. But in many of these cases they’re saying open source it so volunteer group XYZ can host a server and keep the game alive. Wouldn’t group XYZ be vulnerable to copyright action?

          • Axolotl@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            The artwork and music is usually on the client side (and if it’s not, the programmers need to get good lmao) so it’s really not a problem

            But in many of these cases they’re saying open source it so volunteer group XYZ can host a server and keep the game alive

            open source refers to a computer program in which the source code is available to the general public for usage, modification from its original design, and publication of their version (fork) back to the community
            (copied 1:1 from wikipedia, i was too lazy to write it myself)

            So no, open source don’t mean that a specific group keeps the server game alive by hosting a server but that the server code is aviable to the public to do whatever they want;

            Another solution is making the code Source-available (like some companies already do: eg Mojang) or just distributing a copy of the server for people to use, without being open sourc