Assemblymember Chris Ward, a key figure behind a California bill targeting the shutdown of online games, has admitted that enforcing the proposed legislation will present significant challenges. The bill, backed by the Stop Killing Games campaign, aims to require publishers to offer full refunds or a playable offline version of a game when its servers are permanently closed.
During a Reddit AMA session, Ward acknowledged that the "California Effect" could extend the bill's influence beyond the state's borders, as companies may opt for nationwide changes rather than implementing state-specific systems. He pointed to past legislative successes in California, such as efforts against surveillance pricing, as precedents for similar consumer protection initiatives influencing other states and international bodies.
Ward conceded that enforcement is a critical juncture for any legislation, stating, "This isn't going to be an easy thing to corral." He expressed the intention to equip the state's attorney general's office and local district attorneys with the necessary tools for effective enforcement, recognizing the substantial impact of the gaming industry within California. Penalties for violations are expected to scale with the severity and intentionality of non-compliance, with a focus on systemic issues rather than isolated incidents.
If passed, the responsibility for pursuing legal action against publishers who violate the law would fall to officials such as California Attorney General Rob Bonta. The article notes a precedent for such actions, referencing New York's lawsuit against Valve concerning loot boxes. The AB 1921 bill, also known as the Protect Our Games Act, is currently under review by the California Senate's privacy committee, with a parallel EU petition advocating for similar consumer protections regarding game server shutdowns also in progress.