The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has declared private, community-run servers for games like Minecraft and Call of Duty to be "illegal," equating their operation to piracy during a recent California State Senate hearing. Jennifer Gibbons, the ESA's vice president for state government affairs, made the statement while discussing the Protect Our Games Act (AB 1921), a bill aimed at compelling publishers to provide methods for continuing access to discontinued games.
Gibbons' assertion directly countered the idea that private servers are a viable option for keeping games playable, a point raised by California state assemblymember Chris Ward. Ward noted that Minecraft is already supported by community servers and that Call of Duty also features them. Gibbons interrupted to state that these servers are "illegal" and not affiliated with Microsoft, adding that community servers for Minecraft do not adhere to the same safety standards as Microsoft's official servers.
When asked by state senator Caroline Menjivar if this situation resembled the "black market of videogames," Gibbons responded affirmatively, calling it piracy and mentioning pending lawsuits against private servers. She also pointed out that the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has identified some large private servers as "notorious markets" in reports on counterfeiting and piracy. Such a designation typically refers to markets where intellectual property infringement is widespread.
While the USTR has indeed named specific private servers in its Notorious Markets Reports, these citations have generally been for facilitating play without subscriptions, such as in the case of World of Warcraft private servers like Warmane and Firestorm. This is distinct from the operation of private servers for games like Minecraft run by friends or community servers for older Call of Duty titles that are no longer maintained by their original publishers.
The Protect Our Games Act ultimately failed to pass the committee stage, receiving four aye votes, three noes, and four abstentions. However, the bill has been granted reconsideration, indicating the legislative effort is not entirely concluded.
In a statement to PC Gamer, the ESA reiterated its position, asserting that "Private servers infringe on the intellectual property (IP) rights of game publishers. Publishers reserve the right to exercise their rights against them." The association also expressed concern that the proposed provision in AB 1921 regarding private servers as alternatives for game preservation could undermine a publisher's ability to enforce IP rights. Furthermore, the ESA stated that private servers operate without publisher oversight and may not uphold safety standards, potentially creating an unsafe environment for players.
Advocates for the Stop Killing Games campaign have criticized the ESA's statements. A volunteer commented on Reddit that the ESA's claims were an attempt to mislead legislators. They expressed confidence that future lobbying efforts, particularly in-person presentations with developer and player support, would be more effective in countering such arguments. The campaign also indicated plans to introduce similar legislation in other state legislatures and potentially at the federal level.