Patrick Breyer and Niklas Nienaß submitted questions to the European Commission on the topic of killing games (the latter in contact with Ross and two EU based lawyers).
EU won’t commit to answering whether games are goods or services.
EULA are probably unfair due to imbalance of rights and obligations between the parties.
Such terminations should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis (preferably by countries rather than EU).
Existing laws don’t seem to cover this issue.
Campaign in France seems to be gaining some traction. Case went to “the highest level where most commercial disputes submitted to DGCCRF never go”.
UK petition was suppose to get a revised response after the initial one was found lacking. Due to upcoming elections all petitions were closed and it might have to be resubmitted.
Also in UK, there’s a plan to report games killed in the last few years to the Competition and Markets Authority starting in August (CMA will get some additional power by then apparently).
No real news from Germany, Canada or Brazil.
Australian petition is over and waiting for a reply. Ross also hired a law firm to represent the issue.
This is a simplified version of simplified version, watch the video for more info.
EULA are probably unfair due to the imbalance of rights and obligations between the parties.
This is the most important amongst the bullet points for me. Companies should not be allowed to hide shady stuff in the wall of text that you are required to accept to play the game that you have already bought.
TL;DW:
This is a simplified version of simplified version, watch the video for more info.
This is the most important amongst the bullet points for me. Companies should not be allowed to hide shady stuff in the wall of text that you are required to accept to play the game that you have already bought.
This has be kindasortagenerally known already, it just doesn’t really matter if nothing is done about it.