California "Game Protection Law" passes: Publishers must offer "full refunds" or retain an "independent offline version" before ceasing services

The California “Protect Our Games Act” (AB 1921) was approved by the Appropriations Committee by a vote of 11 to 2, and it is only one step away from a full-floor vote. The bill requires game publishers to provide full refunds before stopping service, or to release independently operable offline versions; its scope covers all paid games launched in California after January 1, 2027.
(Background: Brother Magji joins the shark investor lineup of the Taiwan version of “Shark Tank”)
(Additional context: Vitalik criticizes the EU Digital Services Act’s “zero-space” governance: a free society must tolerate dissent and not go down the road of online authoritarianism)

Table of Contents

Toggle

• Core of the bill: Refund or offline version, pick one
• Scope of application: Paid games only—subscriptions excluded
• The people behind the push: Stop Killing Games
• ESA: Cost pressure may hurt developers

California’s legislative bodies are rewriting the rules for the lifecycle of digital games. The “Protect Our Games Act” (Protect Our Games Act, AB 1921) passed the California Assembly Appropriations Committee in mid-May by a vote of 11 to 2, marking an important milestone after passing the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee and the Judiciary Committee—having cleared three hurdles in a row.

The bill will next be submitted to the full assembly for a vote; if it passes, it will become law.

Core of the bill: Refund or offline version, pick one

Under the current version, the bill gives publishers two options for “stopping online game services”:

• A full refund to players who purchased the game
• Provide an updated version that can operate independently—an offline version or a community version that allows continued play without relying on the publisher’s servers

In addition, publishers must notify players in advance 60 days before stopping “services necessary for the normal use of the game.”

Scope of application: Paid games only—subscriptions excluded

The bill includes two exemption clauses:

• Games that are completely free are not covered
• Games that are “provided only during the subscription period” are also exempt

If the bill is passed smoothly, the timeline is: starting January 1, 2027, all paid games launched in California must comply.

The people behind the push: Stop Killing Games

One of the behind-the-scenes pushers of the bill is the UK player advocacy organization Stop Killing Games (SKG). The group was formed after Ubisoft announced the closure of the online racing game The Crew in 2024, with the goal of preventing situations where players buy games only to be unable to play them due to service shutdowns.

SKG head Monitz Katzner wrote on Reddit: “Not long before Christmas, when I flew to the United States to help prepare SKG-US, I never imagined we could get this far so quickly.”

The bill was initially introduced by California Assemblymember Chris Ward, and SKG said it had previously “assisted in drafting” the bill.

ESA: Cost pressure may hurt developers

However, the lobbying organization representing major game publishers, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), is explicitly against the bill.

ESA warns that if the law forces publishers to roll out offline versions, the associated development and maintenance costs could place a heavy burden on small- and mid-sized game developers, and may even affect the industry’s overall willingness to invest.

But advocates rebut this: products that players purchase with real money should not “disappear out of thin air” just because a publisher unilaterally decides to shut down the service. The bill’s underlying logic is similar to general consumer protection laws: the purchased product must be usable.

The bill is currently at the stage of a full assembly vote. If California moves first to enact it, it could set a precedent for digital product consumer protection for other states—and even across the United States.