e-petition relating to consumer law and videogames

e-petition 702074 seeks to prohibit publishers irrevocably disabling video games they have already sold. Specifically, the petition states:

The government should update consumer law to prohibit publishers from disabling video games (and related game assets / features) they have already sold without recourse for customers to retain or repair them. We seek this as a statutory consumer right.

Most video games sold can work indefinitely, but some have design elements that render the product non-functional at a time which the publisher controls, with no date provided at sale. We see this as a form of planned obsolescence, as customers can be deprived of their purchase and cannot retain or repair the game. We think this practice is hostile to consumers, entirely preventable, and have concerns existing laws do not address the problem. Thus, we believe government intervention is needed.

The petition closed on 14 July 2025 having received 189,888 signatures. On 3 February 2025, the government provided a written response to the petition, setting out its position:

There are no plans to amend UK consumer law on disabling video games. Those selling games must comply with existing requirements in consumer law and we will continue to monitor this issue.

The Government recognises concerns raised by video games users regarding the operability of purchased products. As the lead department for video games, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) regularly engages industry representatives and monitors how consumers interact with games. We work with the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) as the lead department for consumer protection more generally. We are aware of issues relating to the life-span of digital content, including video games, and we appreciate the concerns of players of some games that have been discontinued. We have no plans to amend existing consumer law on digital obsolescence, but we will monitor this issue and consider the relevant work of the Competition and Market Authority (CMA) on consumer rights and consumer detriment.

Video games sellers must comply with existing consumer law – this includes the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) and Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs). We have provided details of relevant protections below. However, there is no requirement in UK law for software companies to support older versions of their products. Decision-making is for those companies, taking account of commercial and regulatory factors and complying with existing consumer law. There may be occasions where companies make decisions based on the high running costs of maintaining older servers for games with declining user bases.

The CRA gives consumers important rights when they make a contract with a trader for the supply of digital content, requiring it to be of satisfactory quality, fit for a particular purpose and as described by the seller. It may be difficult and expensive for businesses to maintain support for old software, particularly if it needs to interact with new technologies. However, if software is offered for sale that is not supported by the provider, then this should be made clear, for example on product webpages and physical packaging.

If digital content does not meet these quality rights, the consumer is entitled to a repair or replacement or, if not possible, some money back up to 100% of the cost of the digital content. These rights apply to intangible digital content like a PC game, as well as tangible content like a physical copy of a game. The CRA has a limit of up to six years after a breach of contract during which a consumer can take legal action.

A trader or third party can upgrade and improve the features of digital content so long as it continues to match any description given by the trader and conforms with any pre-contract information provided by the trader, unless varied by express agreement.

In addition, the CRA requires that the terms and conditions applied by a trader to a product they sell must not be unfair and must be prominent and transparent. If not, they may also be challenged, and the question of fairness is a matter for the courts. Terms found to be unfair are not binding on the consumer.

The CPRs require information to consumers to be clear and correct and prohibit commercial practices which through false information or misleading omissions cause the average consumer to make a different choice. As such, the regulations prohibit commercial practices which omit or hide information which the average consumer needs to make an informed choice and prohibits traders from providing material information in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner. If consumers are led to believe that a game will remain playable indefinitely for certain systems, despite the end of physical support, the CPRs may require that the game remains technically feasible (for example, available offline) to play under those circumstances.

The CPRs are enforced by Trading Standards and the CMA. If consumers believe that there has been a breach of these regulations, they should report it to the Citizens Advice helpline (or Advice Direct Scotland for those living in Scotland) which is a free service advising on rights and how to take their case forward. The helplines will refer complaints to Trading Standards and CMA where appropriate. Consumers can also pursue private redress through the courts where a trader has provided misleading information on a product.

The CPRs section of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCCA 2024 is expected to come into effect in April 2025. It restates and updates the CPRs into primary legislation, revokes the 2008 regulations and sets out rules around unfair trading. The Act:

• Provides the Secretary of State with the power to add, amend, or remove a description of a commercial practice which are in all circumstances considered unfair
• Provides clarification that someone facilitating supply or promotion of a product is a ‘trader’ and must comply with consumer law

The use of this power will be kept under review – any amendments proposed are subject to a duty to consult with stakeholders and approval by both Houses of Parliament.

The government specifically refers to the new DMCCA 2024. The unfair commercial practices provisions of the DMCCA 2024 apply to the commercial dealings that businesses have with consumers. They include anything traders do that could in some way affect consumers and the decisions they take. The provisions prohibit unfair commercial practices. These are practices which involve a trader misleading consumers, behaving aggressively, or otherwise acting unfairly towards consumers. These provisions apply to commercial practices which happen from 6 April 2025 onwards. The CPRs will continue to apply to consumer contracts made before 6 April 2025.

e-petition 702074 follows an almost identical petition published in May 2024 by the ‘Stop Killing Games’ consumer movement. This 2024 petition received 27,341 signatures before it was closed early due to the general election.

‘Stop Killing Games’ is a consumer movement set up in 2024 by Ross Scott to challenge the legality of publishers ‘destroying’ video games they have sold to consumers. Some video games are designed to rely on a server which the publisher controls, if the publisher decides to take the games offline, the game becomes inoperable. Supporters of the campaign suggest this practice is a form of ‘planned obsolescence’ which is detrimental to customers.

The Stop Killing Games movement is concerned with online-only games and downloadable content being sold to consumers without an expiration date, with the possibility of access being remotely denied by the publisher at any time. While accepting it is unrealistic to expect companies to support games indefinitely, campaigners are calling on companies to implement an “end-of-life plan” to modify the game so that it can run on customer systems with no further support from the company. Companies who do not comply would face penalties for destroying games they have sold.

All Hansard material on the topic of video games and consumers

Recent parliamentary questions on the topic of video games and consumers

Recently, Kate Osamor (Lab) asked a parliamentary question (PQ) on what steps the government is taking in response to publishers disabling video games that have already been sold. Daisy Cooper, Deputy Leader (Lib Dem), also asked if the government will be making an assessment of the potential merits of proposals from Stop Killing Games to require video game publishers to (a) permit and (b) facilitate the use of third party online servers for games when they make a commercial decision to cease support for those titles themselves. On 5 September 2025, Chris Bryant, Minister of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport) provided the following written response to both PQs:

The Government is aware of the Stop Killing Games campaign and concerns relating to the continued access to video games, including licensed, online-only video games, and we appreciate the frustrations of players of some games that have been discontinued. The Government has spoken with the video games industry and has responded to a recent petition on this issue.

There are no plans to amend existing consumer law on disabling video games. Those selling games must comply with existing requirements in consumer law, including the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) and Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA), giving clear advice to consumers. Video game sellers must not omit or hide material information, or provide it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.