Thread 725002940

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONX2KUhyFow
>First, such a change would have negative technical impacts on video game development. It is true that there are some games for which it would be relatively simple to patch an offline mode after its initial release. However, for games whose systems have been specifically designed for an online experience, this would not be possible without major redevelopment.
>Secondly, the approach carries commercial and legal risks. If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services.
>Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.

Once again: You're not allowed to have fun on your own terms.

>>725002940 (OP)
>but think of the children!
Allowing women anywhere near politics was a mistake.

>Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
oy

>>725002940 (OP)
>Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
Why do they use this excuse
EVERY
FUCKING
TIME

I can't believe anyone expected anything to come out of this except for 'no, goyim'
seeking solutions to problems through the system that causes the problems is peak retardation

>>725002940 (OP)
Retarded boomers proving once again that they do not understand what is being asked for

>>725002940 (OP)
this is the UK though, SKG is EU isn't it?

>>725003632
Because sheep like you respond positively to emotional manipulation.

>Devs are lazy
>Uhh how do we monetize this
>WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?
I fucking hate this industry.

>>725003632
psychological/emotional manipulation, mostly of women

>>725003632
how is this a problem when the UK internet ID is implemented? Every chat you do is tracked to your real space ID

>>725002940 (OP)
>NOT THE CHILDREN raised in a UK debate
lol
lmao

What would be the ideal solution for the whole stop killing games movement?

>>725004130
Live service games and gacha become illegal

>>725004130
Easy.
Give players the ability to host private servers.
It's not a difficult thing. A small team could crank that out quick.

>>725004130
if you pay for a game, in the event the developer or publisher ends support - you are entitled to the source code to the game.
note "pay", so free live service games are excluded

>>725004130
There's no solution.
Ross's original motivation behind the whole thing was just his autistic annoyance at the grey zone, I think he's happy enough with a definitive response from government that makes it black and white.

>yes your games WILL be killed and this is the world you live in, too bad!
he just wants to hear those words.

>>725002940 (OP)
>there are games that are meant to be played online mode only!!
Then start planning ahead and make them playable without it. Either you do that, or don't cry when the community makes their own network and mods after you took their money.
>the approach carries commercial and le-
>regulatory complience and paym-
Jewish trash, skip. Not everything has to make money you greedy Rabbi. Your IP is not being infringed in any way because the community only cares about making the game playable.
>No official moderation puts you at risk!!! think of the children!!!!
Orwellian Strawman commonly used by authoritarian governments and power hungry corporations. You don't care about the children.

Why are we trying to debate with Jews again, anon?

>because of the online safety act they disagree with Stop Killing games
I've never seen a more destructive and widely hated piece of legislation

>>725002940 (OP)
So we lost, gotcha

I dont see a solution besides killing all white children

>>725004414
>Why are we trying to debate with Jews again, anon?
because no one has the balls for the only actual alternative

who gives a shit about UK
its india 2.0

>>725002940 (OP)
>Ninja Theory getting a commendation in UK Parliamentary debate in 2025
Wouldn't have guessed this timeline.

>>725002940 (OP)
We're lucky speaking out loud gets grandfathered rules applied to it, because if it were invented today I'm pretty sure it would be made illegal in most western countries.

>>725004130
It's already been laid out, give the tools to make private servers after official support ends.

>>725004130
>Asking lobbyists to give up their rights to exploit you and suck your wallet dry
Not trying to doompost, but this debate isn't going anywhere when you are asking the same people to stop being greedy control freaks. But that really explains the whole push towards mandatory digital ID worldwide in less than a year. They are afraid that we are capable of fighting back. They are desperate to know, and persecute towards anyone going against their tyranny.

>>725002940 (OP)
I'm just getting into listening to it now, looking to see how much of the rhetoric will be tailored around protecting GTA in particular given it's almost certainly going to be online-focused.

>>725004130
If an online game hits below a certain player count, i.e. a dead fucking game, it's allowed to be shutdown. If a game is still active, devs must keep the servers up.

>>725004075
Not only that, server operators would be required to comply with this law. The whole concept makes zero sense.

>>725002940 (OP)
Amazing, completely wrong on all Three points but ended it with emotional manipulation regardless for no comprehendible reason, just told me the sky was purple and its raining blood but I should let someone shit in my mouth for the sake of the children

>>725004130
Shorten copyright terms back to 20 years and let things enter the public domain earlier.

>>725002940 (OP)
Yes yes third point very silly but nobody in this thread can answer the first two points.

>>725004130
Gamers want everything for free forever. Corpos are greedy and do not want things to be this way because they are greedy. Gamers learn economics from communist transgirls because they are retarded shit-eating cretins who deserve worse than they've ever been given by this industry which worked itself to death for them while being spat on for it.

>>725005472
And while I'm at it, ports and remasters don't qualify for fresh copyright terms because they're not sufficiently novel. Something like the Trials of Mana or Trails in the Sky remake can qualify, but not a simple port.

SKG is dumb and it's drawing unnecessary attention toward legitimate player-hosted games from regulators. You never know what these unhinged karen types will do, stop trying to make a deal with the devil and accept responsibility for buying always-online slop in the first place

>>725003632
Because pedophiles exist and are an ever-present and active menace.

>>725003758
>Learns
lol, lmao. Normies will NEVER learn that.

>>725005560
The solution to that is parents actually parenting, not taking away everybody's rights.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/digital-ownership-must-be-respected-uk-parliament-debates-stop-killing-games-campaign-but-government-doesnt-budge/
qrd/transcript/govt.response if you dont wanna watch the video

>However, for games whose systems have been specifically designed for an online experience, this would not be possible without major redevelopment.
Have it only apply to games that release in the EU after the rule has been put in effect
>If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services.
Who is responsible for games that currently use player-hosted online services? Would that not also apply here?
>Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
Once again, how does this work for games that currently use player-hosted online services?

>>725005606
Can't be switched on all the time.

>>725005665
If you can't monitor what your kid is doing, then you don't give them the tools to do said thing. It's really that simple. You don't give them their own laptop or a tablet until they're at least 15.

>>725004703
A cleansing?

more like the ugay lmao

>UK fucking sucks ass yet again
How did Bongs go from the largest empire of the world to this fucking bullshit?
EU one at least has higher members backing it so we might get something out of them.

>>725005747
Every modern parent on earth gives kids ipads and phones to babysit them, you know that.

>Mark Sewards, MP for Leeds South West and Morley, argued that consumers were asking for a “fairly simple” guarantee from game makers: that they won’t suddenly be left with nothing after purchasing a game.

>“I am not demanding that publishers keep servers running forever,” he said. “Campaigners are not asking for indefinite technical support. We are not asking companies to keep pouring resources into a game that they have finished with. What we are asking is fairly simple: that publishers should not be able to deliberately disable every copy of a game that consumers have already purchased, leaving them with nothing.”
at least one of them has a modicum of sense.

>>725005492
>technical impacts
only if they don't account for them during development
if a studio from the mid-2000s can program LAN functionality a studio with way better tools and access to materials should be able to do it in the 2020s, and it doesn't even apply to MMOs because we know you can self-host WoW with the right software
>it's not clear who's responsible
then make it clear, this is a fake problem invented because there's no exact law definition

>>725005846
>Everyone drinks and drives! That's why we should abolish DUI laws
lol

>>725005798
Read 1984. He had his finger on the pulse of what has become the modern eternal Anglo.

>>725002940 (OP)
No idea why anybody would expect the UK government to do anything other than sell itself to foreigners and exterminate its own people.

>>725005846
>Everyone's a bad parent
Then be better parents??? Not a hard concept

>>725005880
Video games are toys for children, so....

The argument of "who would be responsible" is already answered with games that have community servers that run to this day. Why is this a point of contention?

>>725002940 (OP)
So is SKG dead now because of the UK

>>725005982
For bongistanians, EU one is still going forward and has more positivity surrounding it.

>>725005948
According to the debate, 1/6 of adults regularly play video games

>>725002940 (OP)
These dumb fucks don't realize that community moderators are the real threat to children.

>>725005982
People were just launching several options to make it clear on what the legal status actually is
The initiative seems to have the most potential still, and the EU seems very intent on cracking down on retarded vidya practices like microtransactions so devs moaning about "technical requirements" do not bother them

>>725005846
Shitty parenting is shitty parenting, being the norm does not change that.

>>725005982
this is a separate petition that the uk did
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702074
it reached 200k signatures and the video the result of it. they all mention skg as the example being set and the petition i believe asked for the same things.

>>725006036
>For every six adults, one plays video games
That's... that's not a lot. That still leaves five that don't.

>>725006036
Please stop replying to bait

>>725005962
That point actually makes me scared for those that do run community servers for games currently in the UK, since that would mean that eventually that those server owners are 100% responsible for what happens according to the OSA, which is going to kill a lot of those servers.

>>725005560
>Pedophiles: Exist
>Society: Maybe lead in the water isn't so bad as long as it also affects the pedophiles.

>>725006185
1/6th of 39 million people isn't a lot?

>it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services
Duh. It will be a FREE service.

>Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
This is why we must name and shame the servers and admins who might allow for grooming gangs to run on these platforms.

>>725006185
>20 percent of all adults having the same hobby is not a lot
Are you retarded?

>Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.

Oh now we care about kids, huh.

>>725006318
>>725006185
>16%
oops. Close enough anyway. You're still a retard tho.

Do they really "debate" this for only 20 minutes and immediately decide on it? Her speech at the end makes it sound like it was already pre-written out.
This doesn't seem like some official government thing, who makes this decision if all of these people that agreed with it spoke about it, is the UK government this retarded?
Like genuinely who made the decision here?

>>725006403
Welcome to UK Parliament, even the Australian ones last longer to call the cross bench mean names.

>>725003632
Cause it works.

>/v/ surprised that a bunch of shut in boomers who know nothing about the modern world are in charge of writing sweeping legislation for it.
And they call me the radical for saying we should normalize killing politicians.

>>725004130
The final solution

>>725006456
I'm seriously still confused on WHO made the decision after the debate? There was no vote, not discussion, nothing. Was it just that one lady?

>>725006403
Yeah the decision is already made. This debate is just a rubber stamp exercise.

>>725006296
>>725006318
>5.9 billion people on earth are estimated to be adults
>That means that something around 983,333,333 play video games
>This is a "lot" or "a majority"

You're fucking insane.

>>725006534
> only 983,333,333
>not even 1 billionorino members
>not even 2 billion?
>what, can't manage 4 billion adult gamers
lol, lmao even

>1/6 is a lot bro!
I fucking hate you idiots something fierce.

>>725004130
dead multiplayer only games: server tools to make community servers
gaas games: you can simply play all the gaas content without fomo time limitations or connecting to a server

>>725006534
>>725006646
Nobody used the word majority and 1/6 is not an insignificant figure by any stretch, especially with a hobby.

>>725006620
Exactly.

Whenever this conversation starts up, it always bewilders me how many people are like "How would this work?" when online games have been a thing for 30+ years at this point and the vast majority of them were on LAN or had options to connect via public IP.

>>725003632
>give vague reasoning to why something is bad
>use children as human shields when questioned
>if someone continues to question you accuse them of wanting to harm children
>get to pretend/advertise having the moral high ground while doing literally anything
I like how nothing they said about SKG is about children so they had to crowbar that in there so messily every outside perspective is confused to why that’s brought up and what is said is completely wrong
>the sky is purple
>what?
>think of the children
>…what?

>>725006685
Shut up cuck. My point is that the vast majority of adults still don't play video games. You're still a minority.

>>725004130
Behead all politicians and expel jews

>>725006646
1/6 of your paycheck is not a lot
1/6 of your mom's ass is a lot
1/6 of your country drafted to be soldiers is a fucking lot. It's all about perspective.

>>725006738
didn't read but you seem like a creep

>>725006734
>it always bewilders me how many people are like "How would this work?" when online games have been a thing for 30+ years at this point and the vast majority of them were on LAN or had options to connect via public IP.
Boomers in those positions of power don't play videogames, they see them as magical time-waster toys that can be used to make shit tons of money.
>>725006685
Please stop replying to bait, you are better than that anon. You should've seen that when they started putting words into your mouth.

>>725006738
pedo

>>725006876
And you, Mr. Politician, need to spend less time thinking of these hypothetical children and more time doing your fucking job

>>725002940 (OP)
tl;dr
>pls think of the poor millionaire executives that has to give the developers more money so they do more work! mr goldberg and mr silverstein need their new yachts!

>>725006734
malicious ignorance. they know those exist, and they know they're the perfect example, so they intentionally avoid it and play dumb and then ask you to think of the children to get their way. It's doing everything they can to avoid an actual open full debate because they'd lose.

>>725006734
We literally have examples of games doing this too.

>Gran Turismo Sport
>Back 4 Blood
>Warhammer 40,000: Inquisitor - Martyr
>SimCity 2013
>Megaman X DiVE
>Redfall (lol)

>>725006820
Why don't you get REAL CLOSE and get a better, more INTIMATE PERSPECTIVE on MY fucking NUTS nigga. Use your FUCKING TONGUE to LICK 1/6 of MY COCK, FAGGOT.

>>725006913
They said think of the small developers and the children instead, actually.

>>725006973
>1/6th of 3 inches
>0.5 inches
Lol, lmao even. Get back in your cage, cuckie.

>>725007086
My cock is 7" though.

>>725007002
is Roblox banned yet

>>725006341
They always do unless it cuts into their own flesh, like looking into the Rotherham abuse rings.

>>725007086
I think he's saying that an average tongue is only able to cover 1/6 of his cock, there was no unit in that post

>>725002940 (OP)
politicians don't even TRY to bullshit people anymore lmao
those 3 points are ridiculous

Everybody is dooming over this but there were actually a decent number of MPs who understood SKG and were for it and refuted the common counterpoints

It honestly went better then I expected

>>725006403
>>725006456
>>725006524
You're fundamentally misunderstanding what this is about

This didn't mandate a decision being made, and there wasn't one made. We already knew the government's position was that it wasn't something they wanted to address, the point of this was to just bring it up for debate, and it was debated, it's up to the MPs and such to continue to push the issue

>>725006734
Zoomers don't know what LAN is

>>725006403
lol, they had once a petition with millions of signatures to look into the nation wide cover up of child abuse and just took 5 minutes to say "no lol". Even laughed at it at the end of the session. The UK parliament is so openly hostile against their own people like no other government.

>>725006467
Pretty pwease stop making it so hard to spy on you

>>725002940 (OP)
Point one is false, they just have to lazily distribute the server for people to figure out how to run; documentation isn't even necessary since it's out of support.
Point two is bullshit, because it's very clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance; the people running the servers. As for payments, it could be argued that's illegal unless the copyright terms ends since you're making money off someone else's intellectual property.
Point three is bullshit, because operating a server means SOMEONE is going to have to administrate/moderate it. Compliance to laws, again, falls on the operator providing the service. Security is irrelevant, it's out of support and you're being provided the ability to use it AS-IS without warranty.

From what I could tell in the video, there was literally only one guy in opposition and everyone else was for it? And then the government just drones out some prepared response dismissing everything and they adjourn. What a shitshow.

>>725004414
This post is based beyond belief

>>725004130
The initiative itself already makes it quite plain that online-only games don't have to do anything but fork over the software to run a private server and service games have to have some kind of offline function so that they're not dead when the publisher decides it's done.

>>725002940 (OP)
> However, for games whose systems have been specifically designed for an online experience, this would not be possible without major redevelopment.
oh my fucking god are they retarded?
SKG was NEVER about games that are ALREADY OUT, it's about developing FUTURE games with this in mind, NOTHING NEEDS A "MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT" cause NONE of the already existing games needs to be changed, this is not and was never about alredy developed games, and THIS WAS CLEARLY STATED IN THE PETITION
>>Secondly, the approach carries commercial and legal risks. If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services.
are they just pretending?
NO ONE IS ASKING THAT
COMMUNITY SERVERS FOR TENS OF GAMES ALREADY EXIST, THEY LEGALLY CAN EXIST ALREADY, THIS IS NOT A NEW THING
and furthermore, IT'S NOT EVEN ABOUT KEEPING SUCH GAMES ONLINE, BUT TO MAKE THEM FUNCTION OFFLINE

ffs everyone is a fucking retard i swear to god

People think petitions and peaceful protest count for shit huh? Sad.

>>725003632
>trying to use that ole reliable when birth rates are flying like a lead brick

>>725002940 (OP)
the entire second point is retarded. OBVIOUSLY there wouldnt be any more actual transactions. as far as moderation goes, that would go to whoever is hosting/owning the servers (if servers are still used for p2p stuff), the same way whoever runs a discord server is responsible for moderating the content posted on it (not discord themselves).
>the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
exposed to what? literally no difference in what they get exposed to in fucking roblox currently. gtfo with this garbage nonsense. additionally, thats only for things that would still be played in an online fashion, and not a single player or lan fashion.

>>725004130
Ideal: Just a disclaimer like cigarettes turning you gay.
Realistic: Participation ribbon
SKGroids huffed too much of their own farts and made little effort actually lobbying their case, so lobby groups are going to continue eating the movement alive.

>"WAGH WAGH Muh signatures!! It's not fair!!"
The shitshow in the EU is going to be phenomenal. So many crying manbabies are going to make this website unusable.

>>725002940 (OP)
>the same entity that wants to destroy all rights of ownership, hates privacy and is currently introducing draconian censorship laws will help me preserve and own my games so I can play them in private on your own terms

>>725010540
It do be like that in this hell world.

>>725004130
If anything is done, it's gpnna be just a prompt before buying telling you that you are purchasing a license and that your access can be revoked at any time for any reason, which ToS already have, but this time it will be more in your face forcing you to scroll and select I agree like with cookies.

>>725005560
except those pedophiles are the ones making the laws

>>725004130
Stop making video games. All the good ones are old as fuck and can run on toasters.

>>725004130
Stop killing games

I thought government would've loved more opportunity to regulate shit, especially bong government.

>>725011575
>I thought government would've loved more opportunity to regulate shit
Oh they are doing it already by pushing ID verification on every part and inch of the internet. You really thought they were going to regulate themselves?

>>725011810
Oh of course, but why are they so hesitant to extend that type of regulation onto these compani-
Never mind, I figured it out.

>>725004075
yet another point in my yet unrefuted theory that britain is a demonic presence that only serves to make the world worse
nuking isreal isn't enough, you also need to flood the UK for the world to heal

>>725011575
I think you've a very myopic view of global politics if you think consumer protections that specifically target one of the largest companies in the country was ever in the purview of any major UK party, and just fundamentally don't know anything about English politics if you expected their public petition system to ever generate any response beyond the word "no".

>>725002940 (OP)
>SKG
That's the UK petition, not SKG, and anyone who thought anything would happen with it is fucking retarded, the UK is a dystopian nightmare.

>>725012063
Yes Anon just the UK. not your safe little bubble. You safe little precious boy.

>>725012313
I know you want to believe the UK is the entire world, but you'll have to accept your country is a fucking shithole nobody cares about, except to laugh at when your new weekly government official Rajeesh Benshod Pooinloo decide to import more indians.

The UK and EU were the final fronts for this push. Was laid out clear as fucking day what the issue was and government just gave the industry a little slap on the wrist and went

>oh game developers should tell people they're going to fuck them over but we cba to enforce or amend anything

FUCKING FUCK THIS RETARDED DOGSHIT NO MORE TAXES

>>725012483
It's all up for the EU now. If that fails there, then it's ogre.

>>725002940 (OP)
>goberment actually doing it's job for once and keeping the communists at bay
Rare Bongland W

Can we not point at all the community-ran private servers for old games the currently exist and say "just do what they're doing right now".
All this retardation over "who will do this?!" and "who will pay for that?!" Is already answered: the nerds who care enough to maintain the private server do this shit IN THEIR FREE TIME and OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKET.

Can we just admit that nuking the entire anglosphere, including every country that was ever ruled by anglos, would drastically improve the entire world?
Not like there are any white people left in those countries anyway.

>>725003494
the problem isn't women, a man would've said the same thing. the problem is the whole corrupt structure of british politics.
the people currently in power are only in power because they colluded with the press to harm their own party when a leftist was in charge. they now pursue almost exactly the same policies as the previous government. (which was itself destroyed in an orgy of self-sabotage when they elevated a rightist to the leadership...)

britain is a country run by and for its press, and its press are feral.

>>725002940 (OP)
this is literally the same shit that is constantly being spewed out and is completely ignoring the entire point of the movement
>who is going to be responsible for payments to third-parties for core services?
>hurrdurr security if we remove moderation your children may be exposed!
>dude the current games would have a hell of a time implementing this!
Let me guess, the one who also debated was part of this group that was vehemently against because it doesn't benefit their interests

>>725012971
Not quite yet. There's still hope, albeit very miniscule. I'll give Anglos (and by extension Celts/Scottish/Welsh/Irish) the benefit the doubt that they can fix their shit solely because they make/made great vidya and it would be a shame if we lost their amazing autism in regard to video game ideas and design in the likes of Peter Molyneux or Chris Sawyer
t. Slav

>>725012474
Says the fag whos surrendering his consumer rights to an industry that has a majority of revenue going to the UK.

Pull your pants back up faggot.

>>725002940 (OP)
Think of the children

>>725003494
This isn't a woman talking point. This is a "use moral guardian panic to self-justify either never taking a stance or enforcing restrictions we want" situation. Any gender, any race and any political alignment will use it to their advantage.

So how long before they 'officially' pull the plug on 4chan in the UK anyway? Obviously hiro ain't paying shit but that was months ago and nothing has happened.

>>725002940 (OP)
>Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
Nothing feels better than knowing no political party would disagree with this sentiment in the UK. Really makes me glad to know I could never vote my way out of their thinly veiled power grabs.

>>725013779
Also, didn't imgur get blocked pretty much immediately for being noncompliant? What's the deal here?

>>725002940 (OP)
>uk
It's fucking nothing. Call us when a real country does something.

>>725013779
Probably never, it's too powerful a surveillance tool. They would rather just use it as an excuse to disappear bonganons.

>>725013895
The guy spearheading SKG himself said the US is a lost cause and EU and UK are the last chance you retarded bitch.

>>725005982
Nah, this was just a side thing that was kind of expected to fail. UK can't be trusted to do shit

>>725013961
The US is a lost cause, but the UK is fucking irrelevant. The EU might be usable but the UK is a global laughing stock. Any sort of regulation people try to pass there will be looked at, laughed at, and then ignored.

>*kills your chud games*
nothing personnel

>>725004130
Force companies to invest a tiny fraction of their time to make servers available to users so that when the userbase bite the bullet the game can still be playable.
Also total Irdeto death.

>UK Parliament
who gives a fuck
arent you bongs supposed to be blocked from browsing the chans by now

>>725005798
britain was only a nation from ~1945-82. before then, it was an empire: scotland, england, wales, ireland, etc, were nations and "britain" was an empire. there's a reason most of churchill's speeches speak of "england" instead of "britain": his national identity was english. after ww2, with the empire collapsing, britain had to establish itself as a post-empire nation state. this was fairly successful, but in the 1980s economic and social reforms destroyed the support beams for the national project, turning britain half-way back towards imperial cosmopolitanism, only without the empire and with a good heaping of chauvinism.
nowadays britain is a weird historical anomaly like Austria-Hungary, a non-national, non-federal state.
it doesn't have a national economy (it has regional economies, a wealthy london+south east, and then many of the poorest areas in western Europe) and its national identity is increasingly frayed (rising Scottish/Welsh nationalism, Irish unification sentiment, and even rising English nationalism...)

>>725012971
Shalom

>Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.

Doesnt almost every GaaS slop's ToS state that the publisher/developer are not responsible for online interactions? Its why WoW roleplay realms are infested with groomer degenerates

Children are one of the highest groups injured or killed in car accidents, therefore we are now banning car ownership for their safety. If the word is given Ford, Fiat, BMW etc will confiscate your car with no notice and no compensation.

>>725014425
>Doesnt almost every GaaS slop's ToS state that the publisher/developer are not responsible for online interactions?
shhhhhhhhhh, stop noticing things

>>725002940 (OP)
>>First, such a change would have negative technical impacts on video game development. It is true that there are some games for which it would be relatively simple to patch an offline mode after its initial release. However, for games whose systems have been specifically designed for an online experience, this would not be possible without major redevelopment.
Except retroactively adding it was never asked for
>>Secondly, the approach carries commercial and legal risks. If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services.
those services would be terminated or given to the users to manage a la private server hosting
>>Finally, and perhaps most importantly from the perspective of gamers, there are the safety and security impacts to consider. Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
luh mao
no wonder they're going full thought crime in the UK if this is what their politicians believe. I pity all who live in the shithole that is the modern caliphate of britain

>>725014027
And if it passes? You'd let your game ownership go just because a country you don't like did the right thing?

The US is irrelevant. The UK is still an ongoing battle

>>725014425
The legal clause that they aren't responsible is separate from the pretend moral notion that they ARE responsible, which is the whole societal excuse for strict control of all online communication

>>725014516
I told you what happens if it passes, nothing. Because Britain is irrelevant. You need a country with either a sizeable market or a large cultural influence to pass it for it to mean anything. I don't like that it's how it is, but it be like that. I would love to be wrong but I'm not. Companies would sooner give up the tiny as fuck british market than give an inch.

>>725002940 (OP)
I cannot adequately verbalise how much I fucking despise the government of my country

>>725003928
Relax guy,

>>725002940 (OP)
Good. UK is literally 1984(or at the very least british politicians want to turn their island into real-life Oceania), why would you want these kind of people to have more control over video-games and your life, they even want to ban this site for fuck's sake.

>>725004130
Piracy
>Pirate the game
>Reverse engineer the netcode
>Host pirate servers
>Release how to host said pirate servers and how to run them "offline" so you can play single player in a local server

>>725002940 (OP)
Give one reason why anyone should care about digital hoarder rights.

>>725002940 (OP)
>Secondly, the approach carries commercial and legal risks. If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services.
Yea goy, you being able to host your own servers is bad for companies because you didn't state how you're going to pay taxes for owning the server

>>725003872
Pretty sure moldman tried any legal recourse available in any country that has it including the UK and Australia.

>>725002940 (OP)
>Removing official moderation from servers
This is the real reason why they'll say no and it's probably why the EU awill say no too.

Community servers, decentralised will skirt around their chat moderation and suppression of news. They can force companies into blocking chats and banning users, it's a lot harder to do that to community servers. Suppression of news and free speech is simply the reason.
I'm surprised I still can use 4chan, aren't the government "fining" 4chan lol?

Which is retarded because these retards intentionally pretend not to know how technology works, they know full well that anyone can host a unmoderated chat room from their home computer. This is just a way for the "labour" party to continue being the authoritarians they are with a bonus of being the party of international corporations.

Watch SKG get killed in EU because of this. The EU isn't selling itself to foreign corporations but they are still authoritarians and call for chat control every time they're allowed to.
SKG probably got ruined by being debated in the UK, we've given the EU and corporations all the talking points and confidence they need.

I don't really care about SKG. Not that I don't want games preserved but any game worth its salt will already be preserved from day 1. Shit games like The Crew, Wildstar, Anthem, Concord and now New World just weren't worth playing at launch so why should I care if they've been shut down?
Good games get preserved because they are good, shit games get forgotten about and ignored because they are shit. Am I missing out by not being able to play Wildstar and The Crew? Not really, thus I do not care about SKG.

Funny just how many posters like this you see since this movement started being discussed, who are keen to let everybody know they are completely above of and unaffected by the issue, because by sheer chance they have never found a game interesting that happened to have any kind if central server dependency. Oh what are the odds.

>>725017421
Even shit games get preserved because of curiosity, passion, for a particular element of uniqueness, for cult following, autistic concern and fervour, or simply for archival sake
But you know, if it straight up isn't possible (or nearly impossible without exceedingly difficult effort), then that isn't right. Being deprived of the possibility to even make the choice for preservation is wrong

>>725003632
Literal nanny state. They need to somehow regulate the equivalent of leaving your child unattended in a seedy alleyway with a credit card.
Never mind that an adult should have unprecedented levels of control over what their child can access on the internet, that there will always be unregulated outliers and that the country itself can force its ISPs to block these connections. Ultimately these "Think of the children" regulations are all about fucking with adults.
>>725016569
Most of the better multiplayer games on the market are either post-mortem support, are based on mods of games that were hosted on dedicated servers or are outright mods of games.
None of this is possible if a company can kill all support of their game by abusing the DMCA.
>>725017421
Now that online connections are standard for most games, if a game gets acquired by a company, then they can end support by pushing a patch.

>>725018879
so it's multislopper issue?
lmao get fucked

>>725018947
Even singleplayer games aren't immune to having functionality removed after launch.

>>725019073
???
how?
Are they going to come into my home and re-burn my shogun total war discs?

>>725005962
This is easy I’ll translate it for you
>we don’t like the idea of private servers because there’s no way for us to control the discussions that happen there

>>725018552
>>725018879
any game good enough to warrant preservation by an autistic cult following will already have been preserved by the sheer willpower of that autistic community
bad games do not get preserved because they are bad
what you are essentially trying to advocate for is the preservation of those shitty drawings you did in art class that got sent to the local library when you were 7 years old

>>725019073
Nta but when win7 support ended I took my PC offline and haven't connected it to internet since yes I'm phonefagging full time deal with it
If they want to do anything to my games they'll have to brave southside to get to me.

>>725002940 (OP)
Everyone who signed this should be banned from this site, as they're clearly underage and have no idea how the EU works. SKG was never, ever going to succeed. The EU parliament exists so people who aren't officially your head of state, can pass laws you don't even know are being discussed, which will massively impact your country, 99% of the time in a negative way.

>>725019963
1) This is regarding the UK petition, not the EU citizen's initiative
2) The EU Citizen's initiative already has strong precedent to previous country laws and other forms of EU legislature, there is nothing wrong with trying to see how vidya stacks up to these previous consumer rights laws.

>UK
lmao

Absolutely incredibly how the UK Gov had to reply to SKG three times and each reply was more worthless than the last, despite the first reply being so off-topic that they were almost forced to give a better one because of how bad it was.

UK is basically just US colony, so no surprise here

>>725012964
They actually did point at community run servers at the end.

For not complying with the online safety act, which they are investigating in the future.

>>725002940 (OP)
>You're not allowed to have fun on your own terms.
Sure you are, just make your own games instead of demanding slave labor from others

>>725013280
Where does that leave EU or Australia, who are doing the same things, or christcuck USA also doing the same things?

We have Elon Musk on Joe Rogan now saying we're going to get "universal high income".

>>725022861
>christcuck USA
the christian right lost so hard their party was taken over a reality tv show host that used to be a registered democrat. deserved, honestly

Oh no! You're telling me they used the completely reasonable and valid arguments you 'tards refused to engage with!? Who could have seen this coming!?

Morons.

>>725023009
Orange man also used to be in Ross Perot's 3rd party.

>>725002940 (OP)
>The greedy corpo-niggers have investigated the suitability of policies that hurt greedy corpo-niggers and have found that these policies would be antisemitic and hurt children
2025 and somehow 'conflict of interest' is not a crime with the penalty of execution.

>>725023272
>completely reasonable and valid arguments
name one reasonable and valid argument used by the UK Gov that's actually relevant to what SKG is asking for

>>725004130
The best solution would be proponents of SKG being educated on the basics if copyright law and told in no uncertain terms that what they want is stupid and unreasonable.
If they persist put them into assisted living because they're obviously too mentally handicapped to take care of themselves.

>>725023432
>SKG kids ignore the arguments in OP for months and months, dismissing them instead of finding a way to counter them (which, admittedly, doesn't exist because they're 100% right)
>Those arguments are used successfully in parliament to shut down SKG
>Anon STILL refuses to change tack, simply declaring the arguments that are obviously convincing lawmakers invalid
God damn y'all niggas is DUMB

>>725002940 (OP)
>While yes it is possible for game companies to create an end of life plan..
THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!
How have brits not tossed these retards into a volcano yet, is this some kind of humiliation ritual

I have to say, it is endlessly funny watching you clueless shut-in dipshits flail about and scream and whine like toddlers.
Actual literal fascism is rising, there's plastic in everyone's balls, food monopolies are price gouging like crazy, weather changes are poised to knock out a majority of farmland in the next 20 years, but no: what justifies violent revolution is apparently not being able to play The Crew.

>>725010540
they don't want to destroy all rights of ownership at all. there are some rights of ownership, like the incompetent private water companies or the gambling companies which have bought 90% of labour MPs, which are sacrosanct.
they only go after ownership rights when they've got a purpose in mind, like with the recent EHRC guidance that says private companies aren't allowed to let transgender people use the toilet (even though there's no law requiring that firms have separate male/female toilets for customers, you just have to provide toilets. who gets to use which toilet is a matter for the firm, like deciding if customers can wander around the storeroom at the back or if that's trespassing. the EHRC just hates troons enough to make shit up.)

>>725023448
Copyright law exists to allow the government and interest groups to censor media, by pushing for the consolidation of publishers who are more easily pressured by denial of services across the board, it has no basis in any kind of benefit for society or else Eldred v. Ashcroft would have had the exact opposite outcome.
SKG is outright necessary because of copyright law, since the DMCA allows for the takedown of anything that circumvents DRM, which can be necessary for providing third party support.

>>725019963
hey doomer retard, the post is about UK parliament, there's UK written in teh OP image, and if you even cared enough to open the video you could've seen it was posted by the fucking UK Parliament itself.

>>725023828
>but there are different, worse things happening!
yeah nah

>>725010540
Probably didn't expect much but dreaming is free.

>>725023559
(you)

>>725023448
>what they want is stupid and unreasonable.
I want my games to still work after the company decides to end support for it. How is this unreasonable?

/v/ lost… AGAIN

>>725023448
>The best solution would be proponents of SKG being educated on the basics if copyright law and told in no uncertain terms that what they want is stupid and unreasonable.
>What was considered 'the norm' 20 years ago is unreasonable and stupid
What did retard-kun mean by this?

>>725023828
>what justifies violent revolution is apparently not being able to play The Crew.
Or maybe people are saying that because it's just another one of many stacking examples (that you already mentioned) of the government not giving a single fuck about their people and that they will always side with making things worse just to benefit multibillion dollar companies a bit more while using the exact same excuses each time.
And this shows they will do it even for the most insignificant cases in the grand scheme of things, showing they won't even let the plebians have anything nice at all.

It's ridiculous to think that whenever someone calls for violence because something happened, the default is them living under a rock for years and only now suddenly waking up, rather than simply being progressively more fed up and calling for violence whenever an opportunity presents itself.
Retard.

>>725023828
>we should not care about this issue here because there are currently bigger problems to think about
Are you not capable of discussing different topics? What makes you think people here aren't also discussing those in other boards/forums/threads?

>>725023889
Copyright law exists so that the creators of things like inventions or music or writing can assert legal ownership of such and make a living without selling physical objects
You are retarded

i read the news saying that more of their citizens got beheaded today and feel bad but then i read shit like this and it feels justified

they really think they won't end up in the receiving end of a machete by the people they are favoring right now

>>725024194
>>725024159
>Actually me calling for violence over basic copyright law is because of other issues!
>Ones I won't elaborate on but trust me bro they exist!
lol
lmao

>>725024081
Anon you weren't alive 20 years ago
At no point has game ownership changed in legal terms
You never owned a game
You always were purchasing a license

>>725024478
Yeah ok thanks for confirming you're not able to comprehend a text. Have a (You) since you're here for those.

>>725003632
Because it has a chilling effect on discussion (nobody wants to risk being accused of supporting pedophila because it's one of the most morally objectionable acts in our society) and your average person doesn't have the cognitive capacity to consider second-order effects.

It's like when you ask a normal person about the death penalty.
Most people will probably say "no, I don't support the death penalty".
Then you say something along the lines of "do you support the death penalty for pedophiles?" and they'll go full mask-off "hit autotranslate on a hebrew tweet" mode.

Or like those videos of people enacting vigilante sting operations that ultimately do more harm than good (sure, you beat up a pedophile, but he's not gonna get convicted and will just carry on doing what he's always done with more caution).

Even looking at my post, I bet there's one or two mouthbreathers starting to see red because I'm not explicitly going "MURDER ALL CHILD RAPISTS".

>>725005982
It is probably...it seems like SKG uses the same argument trying to combat actual manipulation and somehow expects things to change. This is the 5th time the establishment has used the same argument and the decision makers have agreed to them. Surely using the same argument in thr EU will have different outcomes. Lets be honest, at this point i don't think the people behind SKG want the same things as me..i think they want to be known as the people who tried not as the people wo succeeded.

>>725024680
>Yeah ok
I appreciate the concession!
Don't worry, son, your brain just isn't finished cooking yet. You're literally incapable of not being a narcissist at this point.
Definitely try to grow out of that by middle school though

>>725024384
Except the law and systems are tilted significantly in favor of large publisher middlemen and legal firms, not individual creators.
Arduous legal battles are not something that individuals are going to fight and these companies explicitly settle out of court to avoid setting precedents that could make legal proceedings shorter and cheaper for individuals.
You can't even make works based on public domain works in your country without potentially getting involved in an Intellectual Property dispute.

>>725002940 (OP)
Sasuga

The UK is a fucking joke

>>725024737
Anon the "people" behind SKG consist of a mentally handicapped man (seriously , actually watch him play a video game, he has an IQ under 80 for sure) hosting a mold colony and an army of twitch-addicted shitposter tweens.
At no point did anyone involved in this have even the slightest clue what they were doing, but pointing that out just got you bombarded by aforementioned twitch brains.

If you actually thought this was going to work it's time to grow up. Get a little more serious.

>>725024784
>It favors corpos
Ok. That's not what you said.
You said it exists to enable censorship and has no valid or beneficial purpose.
That was wrong and a stupid thing to say.

>>725024997
i mean, yeah?
bongs will never revolt so it's only going to get worse

>>725023828
>look at things that don't affect me
No you mentally ill faggot

>>725025140
I am not asking for a revolution but they could at least stop voting for the people who support such retardation in parliament

>>725024758
you're creating an unwinnable situation for me depicting me as something I'm not and insisting upon it.
I'll forever be glad I'm not you. Can't really muster being this much of an idiot and on 4chan of all places.

>inb4 you mad!
I'm merely pitying you. You have a shitty life, shitty behaviour, shitty hairline, shitty gf, shitty car, shitty job and shitty parents. It's only natural a yokel like you comes here trying to ragebait since your mind isn't capable of more advanced reasoning.

>>725006286
Hilariously SKG seems to have only done one thing:
Alert lawmakers that homemade private servers are being run without adherence to the new online child safety act

>>725025303
>I'm not mad but I'm imagining your life sucks SO HARD RIGHT NOW
lol that's some mad projection dawg

>>725025225
bongs LOVE bureaucracy, they love obeying orders and pleasing their superiors, they think that when they arrest a citizen for expressing their opnion on FB, they have done a great job and they'll earn heaven that way

blokes will chase you to the end of the universe to check whether or not you have a license. Anglos just have this unnatural bootlicking necessity that dwarves every other nation on earth including India, they'll happily throw their friends and family in jail or off the rooftop because their boss said so

>>725025070
It exists to enable censorship and it does so by favoring corpos.
Corpos can be nudged by the government and interest groups in ways that individuals can't and those corpos in turn can be trusted to heavily mitigate the ability of individuals to publish their own works.
A lot of cultural discourse is heavily cemented in making derivative works and a lot of back-and-forth, which means that regulating all of that with licenses allows corpos and governments to halt or steer that discourse.

As an example of this system being used for censorship, George Orwell's Animal Farm is quite famous for being denied by publishers in response to government discouragement, so in a sense it is a system of censorship that is literally Orwellian.

>>725025575
Dwarfs.
The word is dwarfs.
Dwarves is the plural of the race from Lord of the Rings.

>>725025591
Did you intend to link to my post? Because your post has nothing at all to do with it.
I recommend you take your medicine.

>>725025591
>Copyright is censorship it uhh uhh uhh lets publishers refuse to publish works!
lol what the fuck are you talking about retard

>>725025635
whatever, you understood what i meant
it's why they can't vote themselves out of the mess but also why they won't revolt, they don't have it in them

>law wouldn't be retroactive
>literally not your problem
>literally not your problem
woooooooow

>>725025828
I mean, bongland isn't the place where people are turning in neighbors that then get disappeared by an extralegal paramilitary so I'd say in terms of bootlicking they're at least in second

>>725025946
This is exactly the attitude that prevented you morons from formulating actual responses.
Rolling your eyes like a moody teen is not convincing to lawmakers

>>725013280
Leftists are the ones pushing censorship though

>>725026038
>I mean, bongland isn't the place where people are turning in neighbors
nah it's just the place where you get raped if you are a woman

plus someone who hates your culture and your history and wants to replace it with the worshipping of a pedo or straight shit eating is hardly your neighbor and you should kick them out

>>725003767
>>725017067
Six Seven!

>>725026119
But it's all true.
The law wouldn't be retroactive, there are very specific conditions that need to be met for that to be the case and preserving shitty vidya doesn't fulfil them.
It's neither the original devs nor parliament's problem what happens to the servers after the official EOL.
It's neither the original devs nor parliament's problem what happens to server moderation after official EOL.
This is the parliament using dumb arguments that can be disproven in 3 memearrows to not have to deal with this issue.

>>725026215
>Bonglanders love turning in neighbors and bootlicking
>"Seems like America has them beat m8"
>AHHHHHH IMMIGRANTS RAPE POO STEETS GANGS MUH FISH N CHIPS CULTUUUUUUUUURE

>>725024081

He didn't mean anything, it's seething retard babble from the mouth of a bootlicking dipshit.

>>725016569
I get to keep the things I buy.

>>725026354
>The law wouldn't be retroactive
Irrelevant to the point
>It's not the devs or lawmakers problem if the devs' product complies with the law
It very explicitly is
You're just wrong and stupid, like you've been for the months and months you've been plugging your ears instead of engaging with the arguments in play.

>>725023828
>retard thinks people can only be concerned about one thing at a time
>LE HECKIN FASCISM

lmfao you're a moron

>>725026384
kek, ok anon, I think the UK should continue its ways then, sounds like they 100% deserve what's happening to them with arguments like yours

>>725024478
>Calling for violence against copyright law

>>725026552
Anon I didn't make an argument
I pointed out that ICE is way more bootlick-y then anything the UK is doing and you had some kind of racist word association meltdown, like if chatGPT were asked to simulate Nick Fuentes having a stroke

>>725026509
>th-that's irrelevant! why? it it just is OK!
You're a moron.
>it's t-t-totally their problem! why? IT JUST IS OK STOP ASKING QUESTIONS!
You're a huge moron.

>>725026661
>be happy that the government actually does their jobs for fucking once
>"STOP BOOTLICKING"
being eternally displeased with everything is a choice

>>725004075
Those age checks are trivially easy to bypass. Literally the day they were implemented people already figured out how to get around them, so the age check database was being flooded with AI generated images and Kier Starmer's pictures.

>>725026509
I haven't been following shit, but a logical law wouldn't have those issues.
Retroacivity isn't irrelevant. Games in development wouldn't be affected. Only new games would have to abide by SKG rules, so the "it would be too hard to implement" is bullshit. I don't care if the original SKG's proposal calls for all devs to fix past games, because I know that's impossible.
And no, it isn't the original dev's problem if the community servers remove the word filter and add a goatse emote afterwards. There are already laws that deal with that issue indepently of who owns the servers. Again, I don't care what the original SKG proposal wants on this issue, as it's parliament's job to iron out the wrinkles every proposal has.

>>725026038
>extralegal paramilitary

LMFAO leftoids are fucking delusional retards, no wonder you faggots are losing support so hard.

>>725026128
there are no leftists in the british government and less than 20 (of 650 people) in the british parliament. (there are, in fairness, no rightists either. believing in things is a barrier to career advancement.)
the current online safety act was started by the conservatives nearly a decade ago and finished under labour. thinking in terms of left/right obscures more than it clarifies: all the big parties believe basically the same things, but use slightly different rhetoric.
if you take an example like the online safety act, it's been consistently opposed by the left-wing Green party, SNP, and Plaid Cymru but supported by both major parties at one point or another.

>>725025763
If fewer avenues of publishing are available, then that represents a significant and easily blocked bottleneck to publishing, which is why this legislation promotes the ongoing consolidation of publishers, either by allowing publishers to push smaller publishers out of business with court proceedings or by allowing publishers to acquire IP as capital.

>>725026803
>Mmmmmm delicious paramilitary boots
You've got some leather in your teeth

725024673
Reminder corpo-niggers get the rope in the future. Do yourselves a favor and either stay quiet or join the winning side.

>>725026827
>Retroactivity isn't irrelevant
Yes it is.
The argument is not that it's hard for games that were already made
The argument is that it is onerous for future development
That you can't follow this very basic point is alarming
>Laws already cover who is responsible!
They very explicitly do not which is why that argument was made in the first place.

I'm sorry, anon, but "nuh uh" is not gonna work in parliament.
You are all of you children.

>>725026878
Anon you seem lost.
Copyright has nothing to do with one's ability to get a book published. At all.
Also self-publishing is hilariously easy.

>>725027015
>The argument is that it is onerous for future development
Why? It's literally what devs 20 years ago did fine and now it's onerous?

>>725027015
>The argument is that it is onerous for future development
So is realistic lightning, modelling every pore in the character's body and independent hair strands but that doesn't stop AAA devs from pouring hundreds of millions and literal years of dev into it.
And yes, laws do say what can and cannot be shown in games, and if the new devs fuck it up, it's not parliament's problem, just get it shurt down or blocked in the country as they do already. It's that easy.

>>725027159
>It's literally what devs 20 years ago
Anon...you morons have been repeating this INCREDIBLY stupid response for months now. It has never convinced anyone of anything except the fact that you are tech illiterate and unqualified to make any arguments on this topic at all.

Interpreting that insanely stupid statement as kindly as I possibly can: there is no compelling reason to limit this market to 20 year old implementations.

>>725027095
Copy right is literally the right to copy.
It has everything to do with your ability to get something published.

>>725002940 (OP)
>>725005982
>UK debate
the UK was already a lost cause when the department that first received the petition misunderstood it so badly it had to be re-submitted twice, because they kept rejecting it. Even in their "official" response today, about two-third of their arguments have nothing to do with SKG's proposals. Their response basically boils down to "1st, we didn't understand/read the proposal. 2nd, doing anything means we would have to do some work, as UK citizens first and politicians second you'll understand that we can't do that. And 3rd, think of the keeeds!"
They are so desperate to cling to any relevancy that they would never have allowed it, Ross just went after every possible outcome even if it was just a very small chance.

>>725027184
>So is realistic lightning, modelling every pore in the character's body and independent hair strands
And if you were trying to legally mandate those I'd be against it. See how that works?

>>725027378
So you mean it's even easier now? Because why exactly would it be harder? Was there a dark age where such things have become lost technology?

>>725027445
Well, that's for parliament to decide, not >>>(You). Or it should.

>>725027402
Ok kid
Take your meds

>>725027410
>Our proposal was repeatedly rejected for being poorly written
>Clearly we're super geniuses and parliament is just too dumb to get it
You too m8
Meds for all

>>725026865
There's literally zero conservative politicians in any country right now nigger. To be conservative you must conserve something other than Israel niggerjew.
A fucking furry who beats it to cub porn but preserves forgotten media is more right wing than any standing political figure in the world.

>>725027446
>I can't read
Neat!
>>725027568
>That's for parliament to decide
They seem to have decided against you, anon.

Man
Racist fascist teenagers REALLY loved The Crew for some reason

>>725002940 (OP)
>If an end-of-life plan involves handing online servers over to consumers, it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance
no one, what a dumb argument, no one is responsible at that point because the publisher has dusted their hands of it and now its public domain.
same as
>what about loicences for products
they no longer count in the same way as when they, say, cocacola, gave them permission to be used, they understood they could be on the copy of 100 or 100,000,000 game copies. it literally doesnt matter because they already knew going into the deal their brand could be used infinitely on paper.

>wont someone think of the children
oh, I forgot bong courts are all corrupt AND retarded

>>725027640
Well, that's the parliament for you. Big money for no work.

>>725027705
>No one is responsible for regulatory compliance
That's an unacceptable state of affairs, anon.
I shouldn't have to explain why

When have lawmakers cared for the burden on the company? Mandatory seatbelts, emissions testing, fire safety regulation, disability access, and so on are all onerous to the business owner.

>>725005665
you could if the law stated, instead of the OSA, that parents who fail to enable child locks on their kids shit are legally liable.

>>725027596
"the conservatives" refers to the conservative party, which is not conservative, just as "labour" refers to the labour party, which is not pro-worker. they're just brands for two groups of people who believe mostly the same things.

>>725027798
There are clear and compelling reasons to enforce those burdens, and said burdens are not such that they significantly harm the market. Public safety and the prevention of discrimination are compelling reasons.

"But I want to play the video game" is not a compelling reason to materially harm the games market.
>But I OWN it and...
No you don't.

>>725027767
Yes they are, it not being enforced is another thing entirely.

>>725027958
Companies stealing your money by breaking what you bought post purchase isn't clear and compelling?

>>725027963
>I can't follow a reply chain
Neat!
It's remarkable how bad people in these threads are at using 4chan.

>>725028012
It might be if that were even remotely what was happening
Your issue is that this is reality and not your imagination

>>725012971
You're too short-sighted, aim at nuking the entire world.

>>725027767
>No one is responsible for regulatory compliance
I don't need to follow the chain to call out your stupidity. There are agencies tasked with regulatory compliance for everything, few care to actually do shit. Sometimes it's impossible, like piracy, and sometimes is just laziness.

>>725002940 (OP)
>Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users, including children, could be exposed.
That's on the parents, not the developers. Parents have control over what their kids play. If you ask me, the real issue in that regard is parents allowing their kids access to multiplayer games earlier and earlier. When I was a kid my parents didn't let me play online multiplayer games until I was 13 and even then they stressed the importance of stranger danger, never telling people online where I live, never telling them my real name, and never sending people online pictures of myself.
Nowadays parents would rather leave their kids zombified in front of a Playstation or Xbox in the company of complete strangers who might be degenerate sickos than be responsible parents, even if it means putting them at risk.

why did anyone expect this to go anywhere in the UK?
they had petitions about bigger issues and their government didn't give a shit about those either

>>725028075
>>725027958
Explain how it's wrong. Your use of public safety as an excuse was retarded and results from your imagination. It's clear that bribing politicians are corporations. In the 90's and 2000's, before this nanny state nonsense we never had this problem lol.

99.8% of UK government employees and "public servants" are tech illiterate (literal) nepo babies, diversity hires and dysgenic mutants. This country is the most ass backwards example of a western country when it comes to anything tech. They will repeatedly go out of their way to censor and strangle everything tech related and then come out the next second saying they want the UK to be the tech powerhouse of Europe while it's suffering from the most horrendous brain drain in all of Europe except for Russia.

>47:28
>In a perfect world, everyone would have access to their favourite games forever
>But this is not a perfect world
Lmaooo. Yeah I'm listening to the whole thing, it's fascinating hearing this shit being discussed against a serious political backdrop.

>>725028130
You really should follow the reply chain, stupid.

>>725028594
Pretty much everyone was telling Ross that the UK was a total waste of time from the get-go, but it was still an open venue to raise the issue to a government body so he went through with it anyway.

>>725028809
>How is it wrong that "companies are stealing your money by breaking what you own"
No money was stolen
Nothing was broken, a service was ended
You never owned the game

These are basic truths you must accept to move forward.

>>725028971
What did you expect from the parliament that thought it worth it of the time to convoke and discuss a twitter post about Lilly from Zombieland Saga holding a gun hating terfs?
>>725029102
Explain how I'm wrong?

>same arguments SKG has been dismissing out of hand are used and work perfectly
>people ITT STILL refuse to engage with the points and continue to insist that they've made no errors
Pathetic.

>>725029236
But they did not sell a service. WOW sells a service.

Glad to see more people wake up to the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!" excuse. It will be used to justify taking away every right you have or justify any form of censorship. Never fall for it.

>>725029346
Noone cares about SKG's proposal anon. It won't pass as-is even in the most pro-consumer places in the world.
The point is Parliament not wanting to discuss it despite it literally being their duty under stupid arguments that mostly doesn't hold.
Their duty is to take the proposal, make something useable out of it that mantains the point of the proposal, and put it up for debate. What the SKG want in particular issue by issue is irrelevant.

>>725002940 (OP)
>think of the children
I fucking hate this argument, why do parents not do that whole parenting thing and ensure their kids aren't getting groomed online, or viewing something they shouldn't? UK being a nanny state.

>>725003494
>>725004008
>>725003758
>paternalism was invented by women

You can't expect anything good to come from TERF island.

>>725029367
>they did not sell a service
They sold a license to operate instructions on your machine that also rely on an outside service. That service ended.

>>725030342
Did they tell you how long your purchase has access to a service?

>>725029236
Have you not paid attention to how many games with online components simply stop working after service ends? Games that utilize your own fucking internet, that you suddenly can't play online anymore because a company arbitrarily decided to end it's online component. Yes, a portion of said game is now broken.

>You never owned the game
I did for decades lmao, when they were physical. Bootlickers like yourself allowed companies to change the definition of a purchase from ownership to a license.

So you basically admit to being underage lmao.

>>725030426
That's immaterial.
No money was stolen.
Nothing was broken, a service was ended.
You never owned the game.

>The service should be made open!
That's essentially what parliament is taking SKG's practical ask to be. That's why the debate is about the protection of intellectual property, data security, and regulatory culpability.

>>725030454
>I owned the game when it was physical!
You owned a copy of it and a license. If you can't understand that you cannot participate in this conversation.

>>725030272
It's inherently feminine, yes.

>>725029346
What fucking points?
Every single point has been refuted over and over, the only new one is the "think of the children" because it's so utterly retarded even the most devout anti-SKG shills couldn't make up something that stupid.
>Um, the game relies on central servers therefore having it in playable state would have to be a massive redevelopment!
Literally just give server files so anyone can host it for themselves, you already have those. Or at the very least make it illegal to demand a shut down of non-profit private servers of games with no official ones, to stop fan projects that reverse engineered server structure from being killed off on a whim (Battlefield Revival project for example). There is NOTHING that needs to be remade here.
>Um, if non-official servers are made, how are we going to regulate or tax them???
As said in the previous point, servers can be taken down on copyright grounds right now. If you really care about them following guidelines and handing you over free tax money (that you so deserve for fucking over regular people as your only fucking job nowadays I guess) you can simply give exemptions that prevent private servers from being taken down by their respective companies as long as they follow specified guidelines and are either non-profit or provide taxes from their income. Otherwise if they don't it's literally just as it fucking is right now legally of companies being able to sue them on the spot.
Not only is that non-issue but also a literal non argument, policing internet and taxation is not related to the topic at hand. AND it's extremely telling that the government response to consumer rights is literally "uh but how can we censor and tax people effectively then???"
>B-but muh children
LOL
LMAO

>>725004075
because that isn't the case

>>725029346
>it would be too expensive (for the other party)
>it would be harder to ensure that they (the other party) follow the law
>muh children

>>725030836
>what points?
The ones that just won the argument in parliament.
You feeling like you've refuted the points is not the same as them being convincingly refuted. That's just not how anything works. What you consider bang-on refutations parliament considers naive nonsense. You have to move forward with at least that understanding. This isn't going to work.

>Give away the server files
>>725030663
>That's essentially what parliament is taking SKG's practical ask to be. That's why the debate is about the protection of intellectual property, data security, and regulatory culpability.

>servers can be taken down and you can issue exemptions...
You've completely misunderstood this point. It is not feasible to enforce the regulations on these services on private citizens. No lawmaker is going to intentionally create a system that starts legal whack-a-mole.

>>725029346
>obvious samefag keep shitting up the thread with, but theyz right!

>>725031507
>The ones that just won the argument in parliament.
They won nothing, since due process was not kept.

>>725031718
It was not discussed. You have been defending this crap for longer than those fogies thought of it before tossing it into the garbage bin on non-arguments.

>>725031986
Your english is breaking down.

>>725029440
Yeah, but still people are falling for it. And thats not gonna help SKG.

>>725003632
>Removing official moderation from servers or community servers increases the risk that users
roblox is LITERALLY full of pedos preying on kids and that has official servers with official moderation

>>725032073
And? Again, points 1 and 2 are ridiculous, since it should not matter to Parliament at all and point 3 is bullshit.
The costs are not parliamentary issue.
Both the devs and the community servers would have to follow the same laws, so it's dumb to use a "we can ensure regulatory compliance for the devs but not the other people".
Muh chillun is literally not an argument.

The lowest effort solution is to publish the service API and provide support for custom certificates. As close to zero work on behalf of the developers as possible, they keep their source code thus preserving their intellectual property, and just say "ok here's the blueprint for how your service needs to handle things so you don't need to reverse engineer it, implementation is not our problem and an exercise for the reader".

>>725006467
education and good parenting and no non-white immigration is what keeps kids safe
the uk government literally protects muslim pedo rape gangs
but its videogames and social media thats hurting kids...
yeh ok (((mate)))

>>725031507
>The ones that just won the argument in parliament.
Saying "we can't be bothered to do our job" and citing inconvenience as the reason is not winning an argument but a sign of corrupt government.

>>725004130
make internet connected games illegal
lan only.

>>725032421
>I'm wrong?
>N-NO YOU'RE JUST CORRUPT THIS IS CORRUPTION
>VIDEO GAME CORRUPTION
Mm-Hmm.
Good luck in the EU with that.

>>725032492
Answer the points.
What do parliament have to do with costs of implementing policy? Every policy they enact has associated costs, why does that only matter now?
Why can they ensure compliance from the dev but not the community servers after EoS? Both have the same rights and obligations.
There are already laws that protect children, why can't you apply them to the community servers, too?

>>725030757
It literally has the Latin for father in the name.

>>725007310
many such cases

>>725023448
There's basically two types of supporters of SKG. Retards who don't understand IP, and people who know SKG will kill live service games and therefore support it. It's actually probably close to a 20/80 split and most SKG supporters will admit to the later once they go full mask off and stop pretending this whole thing is over shit games nobody cares about like The Crew.

It's not worth debating either.

>>725032736
>What do parliaments have to do with the costs of implementing policy
Ok so I guess we're down to civics 101.
Parliaments are representative governments, representatives create laws and argue positions as a way of representing the interests of their constituents. One of the primary motivations for lawmakers is economic improvement.
If a law or regulation is going to negatively impact the economy that is a strong and fundamental consideration for parliament, and must be justified by some much greater good. This is NOT something new, and saying it is just shows how little you understand about this system.
>Why can they ensure compliance from the dev but not the community servers after EoS?
Because the devs/publisher are an incorporated entity with significant amounts of money to their names and strong documentation. Holding them accountable for failing to comply with regulations is quite easy.
Private citizens and newly created entities that exist solely to host the service have neither of these things. You cannot effectively enforce the regulations in an environment where someone with nothing at stake can incorporate, host in violation of regulation, get a notice, then dis- and re- incorporate. Parliamentarians are not that stupid, they understand loopholes.
>Why can't you enforce child-safety regulations on community servers
I just answered that.

>>725032492
>No, this multi billion dollar industry would never dare stoop down to corruption to prevent new consumer laws that could harm them! This literally never happened before!!!
>No, these politicians would never dare put their own interests above their citizens! They would never refuse to do something because it requires work in form of creating new legislation that wouldn't benefit them when it means less control and less taxes, they always work for the people!

>>725033315
who are you quoting

>>725006467
The UK is a literal dystopian hellhole.

>>725033165
>SKG will kill live service games
no it wont

>>725033282
>If a law or regulation is going to negatively impact the economy that is a strong and fundamental consideration for parliament, and must be justified by some much greater good.
I would consider millions of citizens being able to use the stuff they paid for independently of big-for-profit-corp counts as public good.
>Private citizens and newly created entities that exist solely to host the service have neither of these things.
>I just answered that.
So you shut them down when they don't comply.
Assuming someone is will be a criminal from the start goes against the spirit of the law system.

>>725033582
>I consider the good to outweigh the bad
Ok. Parliament disagrees. You're gonna need more.
>"It's not feasible to enforce regulations or keep services shut down for noncompliance when the people hosting them are fly-by-night incorporations with no money to seize or paper trail to follow"
>dude just shut them down duh
We're done here.

>>725033165
It wouldn't kill live service games, though.
It would just make them explicitly a F2P or subscription model, which is purely a nominal change.
Oh, instead of paying sixty bucks for Overwatch 3 you pay sixty bucks for the Overwatch 3 starter pack that includes a free subscription to the Overwatch servers. Whoopee.

>>725032117
>but still people are falling for it
They literally aren't. Nobody except for 50+ tech illiterate scumbag politician boomers believe any of this garbage.

>>725004130
>Tax cuts on EoS product revenue for releasing offline mode/server hosting depending on product type
>Devs can just put empty values in place of server handshakes
>No risk for consumers or the company
>Company gets a bit of money back for their trouble, consumer has access to purchased product, onus is on the consumer to run the game in a compatible environment
>Requires 0 laws and digital storefronts like iOS/Steam can be the affirming 3rd party for the tax incentive

>>725033749
>parliament desagrees
Well, it's their right to do so, I guess. I'm still free to consider it a bad precedent.
>it's too hard to shut down internet services
It isn't. You are implying the community servers will just pop like cockroaches and rehost every day to avoid compliances like they are cheap and easy to setup. Few games will actually get community servers to begin with.

I wish skg actually killed live service games like everyone says it will because that would be based

>>725034143
>I'm still free to consider it a bad precedent.
You certainly are! Unfortunately for you we're talking about the efficacy of SKG's arguments and not whether you personally think you're right.
>Nuh uh
Great counterargument, very convincing.

the real reason govcorpo is so scared of any independent social function servers being hosted is it will be a hotbed of resistance to the epsteinocracy as society is disintegrated even further. it's to prevent "fascism" (aryans fixing their problems)

>>725033994
Then the parliament should have admitted that or people in the debate should have pointed out that bullshit.

If there are people actually in the know, then there were none of them in the debate.

>>725004130
>single player games with live internet requirement
go the AC pocket camp route and rerelease as a "complete" edition with no server calls for the game's functions, and have a month long window to transfer previous saves.
this took 4 months for the animal crossing team, who had not had an end of life plan for the majority of their run and had a skeleton crew while most of the talent worked on mainline games elsewhere. building a game with this in mind from the beginning would be trivial

>paid multiplayer games
plan with peer to peer connections in mind like Warframe or release private server binaries at end of life, depending on multiplayer scope.
this used to be an included feature in games like Call of Duty.

>f2p live service games/MMOs
this is out of scope for any legal petition on this subject, but server binaries as well.
the list of once-successful MMOs without unofficial private servers is smaller than the inverse, so in many present and future cases all you need to do is give them your blessing

>>725002940 (OP)
>regulatory compliance
only an issue if private servers are commercial, which gives the IP holder damages anyway
>third party core services
the only time i've heard of this being a thing is when microsoft or AWS handle official servers. don't use third party software for your game servers. hardware should be enough. do your own work.
>moderation
i would argue a WoW or Overwatch without Blizzard's involvement would be safer for women

>>725034223
Where am I wrong? It took months for this place to come back after being hacked and it's just an imageboard.
Setting up servers is very hard and very expensive while a site can be (and is) blocked in seconds after red-tape which is a separate problem).

>>725034345
This is overall a very funny post, but what takes the cake for me is
>bro just make using AWS to host game servers illegal lmao

>>725034543
Anon, you don't live in reality. You simply have no fucking clue what you're talking about. 4chan took forever to get back up because it was on an ancient framework and they had to change quite a lot of shit. Takedowns for regulatory noncompliance take weeks.

>>725034669
>Takedowns for regulatory noncompliance take weeks.
And that is a problem with the administrative process, not with the act itself. The act of blocking a site form being accessed itself takes no time at all.
And again, you are assuming people will break the law before they actually do it, which is a worrying thing to hear from a legislator's mouth.

Games use to be about picking up a controller at the couch

>>725034669
>>725034543
4chan was down for 2 weeks retards and most of it was just identifying what got expolited and patching exploits

>>725003494
>think of the children
>except for when we let them get raped by migrants
britain makes the soviet union look like a successful society at this point

>>725004130
Stop buying those games.
>But I w-
I don't fucking care. Stop buying those games.

>>725004130
Mass die-off of established patsies and the detached.

>>725028971
KEK. Best part of this whole shit show

>>725002940 (OP)
>already covered
>literally nobody cares
>"think of the children!"
the UK continues to prove their current government is fucking retarded

I'm not bothering reading the play-by-play. Did anyone in the debate mention that games with community-hosted servers already exist?

>>725004304
should have stayed mostly standard like it used to be

>>725038185
yes, it's just that the person who closed the debate didn't really care about the issue while the guys who showed up about it enough to be familiar with games to present the points sort of did

>>725003494
It’s the most easy moral blackmail you can use a argument
>______ needs to / can’t happen, because children could be targeted otherwise
>what about *insert criticism against _____*
>what are you a fucking pedo?

>>725038185
Imo they spent too long waffling about fluff and being muh passionate gamers and not nearly enough time demonstrating that there are concrete, proven solutions to the problem which have a very established precedent, and that the overhead for providing that sort of thing from the ground up in future is not very big.

>>725029696
they don't give a shit about children retard, it's just a shield they use where if you call them out they get to call you a pedophile for taking away your rights

>>725004130
>best
either there will be a loophole or publishers just have to print on their box that this service will only be supported until year XXXX.
No service or good has to guarantee you that it will work for more than 2 years, not even in europe

UK is all-around hopeless in every aspect, isn't it

>>725003494
>Allowing women anywhere near politics was a mistake.

Humanity is going to go extinct or completely restart in the next few hundred years and letting women vote is the reason.

They are simply too easy to manipulate by malicious actors.

>>725004130
>feces shothun blast of completely retarded posts

This entire board is just shills at this point.

>>725005552
>stop trying to make a deal with the devil
We did try that, anon. But blanket boycotting the likes of Ubisoft and EA doesn't work.

>>725023448
>the basics if copyright law
The basics of copyright law cover reproduction, distribution and publication.
They don't cover private usage rights.

They only cover private usage rights if you live in a dystopian anti-consumer shithole like the USA. The buck stops at the industry TRYING to make it SEEM as if they cover private usage rights, pretty much everywhere else in the world. And it's high time their bluff ended up being called.

>>725023828
"No true scotsman" is a logical and rhetorical fallacy, anon.

>>725023448
maldavius figtree has found the thread

>>725033165
>It's actually probably close to a 20/80 split and most SKG supporters will admit to the later once they go full mask off and stop pretending this whole thing is over shit games nobody cares about like The Crew

They don’t actually believe what they are saying they just want to “win” and be seen as based

>shills spam this dogshit for weeks straight crowing for signatures
>and then keep crowing for more just in case it gets found out a lot of them were falsified
>it passes and everyone celebrates and pats themselves on the back that they saved vidya
>goes before parliment
>shot down like a paratrooper being raked by flak during d-day

Why does it genuinely sound like they're scared that people are free to express themselves in these games more than the actual discussion at hand

>>725027569
That's right. We're so incredibly smart that we're able to figure out that
>which it would be relatively simple to patch an offline mode after its initial release
and
>this would not be possible without major redevelopment.
implies retroactive fixes which is not what the campaign asked for

>it is not clear who would be responsible for regulatory compliance or for payments to third parties that provide core services.
It would be up to their contracts and is also the goal of the initiative to stop from happening
>A: For existing video games, it's possible that some being sold cannot have an "end of life" plan as they were created with necessary software that the publisher doesn't have permission to redistribute. Games like these would need to be either retired or grandfathered in before new law went into effect. For the European Citizens' Initiative in particular, even if passed, its effects would not be retroactive. So while it may not be possible to prevent some existing games from being destroyed, if the law were to change, future games could be designed with "end of life" plans and stop this trend.

>>725002940 (OP)
SKIGGERS BTFO
THOR WON

>>725003703
this board is full of LITERAL retarded nigger redditors now, of course none of them have the fucking common sense nor the awareness to grokmsuch basic ass fucking nigger shit, they literally just do whatever retarded nigger shit every other retarded faggot redditor nigger on this board is all fucking fucktarded nigger-retarded about, god fucking damn

>>725004130
total extermination of every nigger retard who signed the petition, live on tv

>>725004414
>make them playable without it
nah, you can fuck the fuck right the fuck all the fuck the fucking way off, and eat 10 of my asses, nigger

>>725004651
GET FUCKED, NIGGER

>UK petition
>anons talking about SKG
Is 75% of this board illiterate?

Imagine people being exposed to uncensored communication with others. Every last white person must be killed to prevent this.

>>725050957
just you, retard

>>725047286
Because we were celebrating the EU one, not the UK one. The eternal anglos once again failed us.

>>725051115
The UK petition was a side thing, it failing doesn't affect SKG.
The UK is irrelevant anyway.

>The posts in this thread saying that games are too complicated to be without proprietary server solutions
YOU FUCKING APES
You are supposed to design your software in a way that you can decouple it from one set of servers and instantly recouple them to another set of servers to ensure little to no loss of productivity or functionality, why the fuck are video games allowed to get away with this when it is STANDARD for software to fit snuggly into environments regardless of provider? If you are working in a space where this is the case, YOU ARE A FUCKING APE because WHAT THE FUCK are you going to do when your company decides to switch vendors or providers? Rewrite the entire codebase? BULLSHIT, you would just need to rewrite what proprietary calls are needed when you have secured the new vendor, everything else should already be functional. A game if moved to community "ran" would only need the tools to do matches and maybe host profiles (Let's be honest, it would either be a steam profile or console profile these days anyway, so it's not even your database that has them), that's it. It doesn't need anything that would require server clusters or some proprietary data collection algorithm for matchmaking purposes, just the bare ass basics WHICH SHOULD BE THE FUNCTIONAL CODE THAT CAN BE SEPARATED FROM THE REST OF THE CODE BASE THAT REQUIRES PROPRIETARY 3RD PARTY SHIT.
ANYONE WHO SAYS PEOPLE ARE TECH ILLITERATE FOR EXPECTING THIS FOR MODERN GAMES JUST SHOWS ME EITHER GAME DEVELOPERS ARE INDEED THE WORST PROGRAMMERS OR ARE APE BRAINED NIGGERS.

>>725002940 (OP)
>>725003767
>Retarded boomers proving once again that they do not understand what is being asked for
That's not the point. They know that, if they talked about the actual question, they would look incredibly bad. Instead, they try to shift the topic of conversation to their own talking points.

"Allow people to play without server connections" is a very simple statement that makes publishers look very greedy when they say now. "Force publishers to create a new version of the game when servers go offline" is a very different topic that makes publishers look sympathetic. Of course they're going to ignore the first topic and just talk about how awful the second topic is, because it makes them look good.

Well, until people go into the details and find out that they haven't actually talked about the topic at hand.

>UK Government
>Muh think of the children excuse
Name a better duo

>>725052965
The UK government and a flood of indians.

>>725053046
Why is it specifically indians? It's not like they are the only shitskins willing to work for cheap.

>>725047286
that was the EU one, retard

>>725002940 (OP)
>If you really want something and a million of person sign something
>then the governement will talk about it
nice democracy lmao

>>725047616
take a look at how bad shit's gotten over there

>>725053603
It's the UK petition, about 190k brits signed it but it was very obvious from the start this one wasn't gonna go anywhere, the original stance of the UK government was already very negative about it.

>>725053046
>>725053152
it's muslims in the uk, not indians

>>725005560
So why isnt the UK going after irl predators and instead defends them?

>>725033165
>SKG will kill live service games
how so ?

>>725054131
You don't go after the last people funding your country after you wrecked your entire economy.
lmao who am I kidding, politicians don't go after the people funding their own pockets.

>THINK ABOUT MUH CHILDREN, PRIVATE PROPRIETY AND VPN ARE BAD FOR THEM
>You want us to do something against those muslims who keep raping them while being protected by the police ? lmao we condamn you to 2 years of prison for racism

>UK is not only going to shut down their form of SKG, but probably now are going to go after the private servers that do exist within the UK for not complying with their new stupid online safety rules
How the fuck does the eternal anglo put up with this shit?

>>725040980
>No service or good has to guarantee you that it will work for more than 2 years, not even in europe
Yeah it actually does.
The 2 years is a minimum threshold enforced by the EU.
Individual member states are allowed to exceed that.

The most extreme example is the Netherlands.
In the Dutch civic code there is no limit to liability for the trader. Put simply; whatever they sell has to keep working properly for whatever the reasonable life expectancy might be. Smart TV quits getting updates after 6 years while a regular TV lasts for safe use into 10+ years. Trader is liable for that as a defect.

>>725002940 (OP)
>it takes several months and a handjob just to NOT consider enacting a popular petition that would inconvenience corporations
>meanwhile bongs are able to bum rush mandatory digital ID despite NO ONE wanting it
Anglos really are a special breed

why do they keep saying they want to save the children while protecting illegals that rape children

>>725005798
Bongs ran out of foreigners to torture so instead they imported them to their own nation to torture themselves

>>725002940 (OP)
>>725005982
Bongland isn’t even apart or the EU. Why the fuck do people care what’s effectively an American puppet state thinks

>>725055485
>why do [rich pedos] keep saying they want to save the children while protecting [poor pedos]
Truly a mystery

>>725053563
>t-this doesn’t mean anything!
>the next one will be different!!

>>725057080
EU politics are entirely different from retarded modern UK politics

>>725057080
Literally, yes.
The UK petition was never going to pass because the UK government was already hostile to the idea long before it even reached its goal.
Meanwhile the SKG initiative was supported by various EU politicians, and the EU itself have an history of pushing consumer friendly laws. They also really want to be seen as a technology focused power so them having a say on how softwares are made is exactly something they would want.

>>725003928
He clearly responded negatively. You apparently just got butthurt at him criticizing your favorite excuse. I wonder why.