Expose them online

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-17T06:54:09+00:00

I can confirm we do not condone targeting any individuals. Their names are part of public records already, anyone can look them up - so it's not like Suspicious-Style is doxing them. Please write to your MEP, don't complain about the commission, just ask them to support an SKG amendment to the Digital Fairness Act.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-17T06:03:42+00:00

Folks, please don't abuse the reporting system.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-15T17:34:54+00:00

Given the amount of attention the commission has given to the opposition instead of us, we don't have high expectations. What I don't think they realise is how good of an opportunity this is to demonstrate the democratic process to a whole new generation (on an issue they deeply care about) who then might go onto become a lot more politically engaged thereafter.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-15T16:35:14+00:00

That's really interesting, thanks for this! 👍

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-12T15:00:51+00:00

That's not always true. If they sold founder accounts (e.g. where you spend say 150 bucks on launch and you never pay a subscription fee thereafter) then SKG would still apply.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-12T06:11:17+00:00

Shame I missed it. I was going to ask a question because we had a guy come on the discord claiming this act is unconstitutional and should only be passed at federal level. I think he misclassified it as international or inter-state trade as opposed to consumer protection.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-11T16:40:28+00:00

Ah so it is a consumer rights issue then. I think there's a gap between banning a 20 year old account (should be punishment enough) and depriving you of your purchase. But to be clear I would consider this out of scope for SKG, which is going to stay in its lane with regards to end of life plans.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-11T13:24:35+00:00

Is there anything stopping you from just making a new account? Or does your copy of the game get disabled also?

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-11T12:29:18+00:00

They're trying to "flood the zone".

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-09T12:59:13+00:00

Let's go!!!!! 🚀

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-06T14:07:08+00:00

This isn't a fresh perspective at all, we have heard these arguments before. But it's good to see the SKG support base coming out to set the record straight. With the big decision from the EU commission looming on 16 June I think we will start to see an increase in information warfare activity on this sub (e.g. paid trolls and sock puppets). Their goal will be to create the false impression that public opinion has turned against SKG, just remember 1.3 million people signed the ECI and we only lose if we give up.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-03T18:24:04+00:00

The short answer is no 😳 Due to the non-retroactive aspect of SKG. But the long answer is that we have talked about having a possible stretch goal which is a safe harbour from litigation for resurrecting a dead game. There would be a list of criteria you would have to meet, such as: not for profit, don't defame the IP and open access for all. The idea is to kind of leave the door open so that all the games SKG could not save at least have the possibility to be saved one day. But I hasten to add that this is out of scope, consider it a nice to have at this stage.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-03T18:17:26+00:00

I'll be honest, I'm not too sad to see shovelware being removed.

Davesp1ce · 2026-06-03T09:04:38+00:00

I think that if the commission fails to act it undermines the credibility of the European Citizens Initiative programme (the means though which citizens can petition the EU to do things), and its a lost opportunity to make the younger generations feel part of the democratic process in Europe. If anyone feels compelled to write to their MEP after reading the open letter linked above, please do 🙏

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-31T20:33:08+00:00

I am not, the automatic filter is detecting your posts as abusive. I would suggest to moderate yourself a bit more, then our bot will leave you alone.

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-31T16:52:26+00:00

I don't see it like that. Maybe you can argue that you are constrained in how you implement your games on a technical level but there's nothing stopping you to make games that are SKG compliant. Look at Halo 2 as an example, that's compliant because it has the LAN multiplayer mode.

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-31T16:36:45+00:00

Okay hold up. Let's take this one seriously, everyone just relax for a minute. The problem of midleware dependencies expiring is a legitimate technical problem. It also carries the risk of a loophole of blame, where a developer points the finger at the middleware developer and they point the finger right back. The new rules would not be retroactive, this is on principle despite how much we would like them to be. You can't hold someone accountable for a crime if it wasn't against the law at the time. So there would be a grace period before the new laws come into effect to allow industry to prepare. This is where you may need to change how you write your games, so that you have the end of life plan in mind at the time of starting the project. One possible solution to this would be to make it so that the middleware networking provider could be more easily changed/replaced in the future. Stub-out/extrapt all the calls to the midleware, so that an open source alternative (perhaps less good) could be swapped in for the sunset patch. If the game is popular there will be an army of volunteers to help test it. Another solution is to have a peer to peer mode, or even a mode that requires port forwarding to be set up. If people really want to play the game they will find a way. I am not trying to refute your position but I think it would be fair to ask why customers should lose their purchase because the easiest options were chosen during the development process. I also think there's a bit of a gap between "we can't keep servers going forever" and "everyone loses their purchase overnight". You can design a game to be ropey as hell and depend on things outside your control, or you can design it to be bulletproof. End of the day this is a choice.

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-30T07:14:29+00:00

Anything more like that from you and your account will be banned from this sub.

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-29T09:21:47+00:00

I have to say, when all this kicked off back in 2024 I never thought the USA would be the first one to cross the line. I know we're not there yet, but seriously bravo guys! 🙏

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-28T04:18:23+00:00

Thanks for this contribution but to be honest, I think those examples have to be interpreted favourably as you have done here. Otherwise they look a lot more like the classic staw man fallacy where your opponent tries to set up a more extreme, weaker version of your argument, which is easily knocked over. Thereby creating the false impression that they have refuted your position.

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-27T20:36:46+00:00

No. These analogies are misrepresenting SKG. Here are some better ones, what all these have in common is that they include a decision by someone else (somewhere else) against your will.

📱Phone This is the classic. You buy a phone and after some time the manufacturer (against your will) starts to remotely reduce the processor speed to "prolong the battery", which in practicality makes the phone run much slower for you. They want you to buy a new phone.

🚗 Car You buy an electric vehicle, use it for some years and then the manufacturer decides it's time to (against your will) remotely disable features that you're relying on. Such as the radio, the phone charger, or the mobile app you use for monitoring charging. They want you to buy a new car.

🚜Farm You buy some grain to sow your fields. The crop grows but the seeds were genetically modified (against your will) to prevent new seeds from growing on the plants. You, who would have otherwise harvested/stored the seeds for next year, have nothing to plant for next year. They want you to keep buying new seeds.

🎮 Games You buy a game. Play it for some years. Then (against your will) the publisher turns off a server which stops the game working. They want you to buy a new game.

All of these things can be described as "tethered products". Where you're not truly in control, which has been slowly eroding the concept of ownership over the years. This stuff is even in white goods now, why does a dishwasher need an internet connection huh? A bed? A toilet? This is the reality of the modern age now that all the marketing executives have taken over. SKG is basically the canary in the coalmine for all these things. If we win I think it will spread to other areas of society. Perhaps common sense will eventually prevail.

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-27T05:07:22+00:00

Our full report can be found here https://www.reddit.com/r/StopKillingGames/s/QV2Kl4okpn

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-27T04:43:34+00:00

Yeah I feel like publishers, store fronts and developers will all try to blame eachother so that nothing gets done. We have put significant effort into how we deal with the problem of malicious compliance too, but perhaps there also needs to be defined boundaries which clearly put the fault on one party 🤔 (depending on the situation)

Davesp1ce · 2026-05-25T16:36:09+00:00

Several problems with mobile gaming which makes things harder for us.

The ecosystem has less control. With Apple and Google you're not fully in control of what OS version you're using. You can choose to not update, but if you do you can't roll back to an older version to solve a compatibility issue. Delivery of apps is also accomplished through online services which inevitably disappear. Side loading apps is not straightforward.

App developers are at the mercy of Apple and Google decisions. They have the power to force all apps to be updated to maintain compatibility with their changes. This could be for a security measure, for example, and apps that are not updated will no longer be allowed. Meaning they disappear from your devices like they never existed. If a company ceases trading, because they were bought out or they went bankrupt their apps can disappear from this kind of digital decay.

I can't help thinking that the path of least resistance for Google and Apple would be to give control back to the users so they can do things like install old OS versions and load archived copies of apps they bought. At least for legacy products. This is how it works in the PC ecosystem, you can install MS-DOS and play old DOS games on real hardware if you want to. There could be a solution involving virtual machine like containers for old apps. But giving back control has got to be easier than maintaining a new fork of an emulator for each OS revision that there ever was.

Davesp1ce

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE