Anonymous
7/3/2025, 6:34:07 PM
No.714397816
>>714396227
Running an online game server cost money indefinitely, shutting a server down because it's no longer profitable is a completely valid reason for any business regardless of its size. When a customer purchases a game, they are buying the ability to run that executable locally. The idea that shutting down a game server is the same as destroying the player's copy of that game is completely incorrect. Forcing games to be compatible with private servers sounds nice in principle, but if the server code contains copyrighted material then it could end up being very awkward to accomplish in reality.
The only law I can see coming out of this is that game devs/publishers will need to specify an end date for when their games will no longer be supported. A bit like how some tech companies publish EOL dates software or hardware. Otherwise it's down to the customer to boycott games that partake in shitty practices.
Running an online game server cost money indefinitely, shutting a server down because it's no longer profitable is a completely valid reason for any business regardless of its size. When a customer purchases a game, they are buying the ability to run that executable locally. The idea that shutting down a game server is the same as destroying the player's copy of that game is completely incorrect. Forcing games to be compatible with private servers sounds nice in principle, but if the server code contains copyrighted material then it could end up being very awkward to accomplish in reality.
The only law I can see coming out of this is that game devs/publishers will need to specify an end date for when their games will no longer be supported. A bit like how some tech companies publish EOL dates software or hardware. Otherwise it's down to the customer to boycott games that partake in shitty practices.