Latest news with #EULA
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
08-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Business Standard
'Stop Killing Games' petition gets over a million signatures: What is it
A European petition calling for stronger consumer rights in digital gaming has crossed 1.2 million signatures, prompting formal review by the European Union. The Stop Killing Games campaign was launched in 2024 by YouTuber Ross Scott, following Ubisoft 's controversial shutdown of The Crew—a title rendered completely unplayable, including its single-player mode, after servers were taken offline. The incident sparked concern around digital ownership, with many players realising they could lose access to games they legally bought. Adding to the controversy, players have recently pointed out a clause in Ubisoft's End User Licence Agreement (EULA) that requires users to uninstall and destroy all copies of a game if the company ends support. Though not new, the clause has resurfaced as the petition gains attention, reinforcing concerns about what it truly means to 'own' a game in the digital age. Similar terms also appear in EULAs from other major studios, underscoring how widespread this approach is across the industry. Legitimacy questions and industry backlash The petition, filed under the European Citizens' Initiative—a formal process that allows EU citizens to propose new laws—needs verified signatures from at least seven member countries. Though the campaign has crossed the 1.2 million mark, Scott has warned that some entries may be invalid or incorrectly filled, and spoofing submissions is a criminal offence under EU law. To ensure eligibility, organisers aim to reach 1.4 million signatures by the end of July. Meanwhile, the gaming industry is pushing back. As reported by Engadget and Video Games Europe, a coalition including Microsoft, Nintendo, and Electronic Arts argues that the proposal could increase development costs, raise legal risks, and limit creative flexibility—especially for always-online titles. Studios also claim that allowing community-hosted servers would compromise player safety and expose publishers to unregulated content.
Express Tribune
08-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Express Tribune
Ubisoft updated EULA: Is Ubisoft really asking us to delete our purchased games forever? Find out full details
Ubisoft's revised End-User License Agreement (EULA) has raised concerns among gamers, with the publisher now requiring players to 'destroy' their games once support is discontinued. The update, first reported by Tech4Gamers, clarifies that players no longer "own" their games but instead purchase a license to play, subject to the company's terms. The updated EULA includes a 'Termination' clause, stating that players must uninstall and destroy all copies of a game when Ubisoft ends support, terminates their account, or discontinues the product. This move has led to significant backlash, with many players expressing frustration online. Fans have taken to X (formerly Twitter) to criticise Ubisoft. Ubisoft has completely lost all plots imaginable. Forcing people to destroy all copies of a product? Legally bought copies? Wording is interesting, though. So it IS indeed a PRODUCT, not just a license. And it IS in our POSSESSION, as in "WE OWN IT", not just a temporary access. — Does it play? (@DoesItPlay1) July 6, 2025 Ubisoft wants you to delete your games once the live online service ends. This is why we need stuff like Stop Killing Games. — MR. OBVIOUS (@ObviousRises) July 8, 2025 Sony joins in what Ubisoft is doing and tells you to destroy all copies of your game, when they stop supporting it — Man and Superman 🥊🥋🏀 (@MainEventTV_AKA) July 6, 2025 The update also allows Ubisoft to revise the agreement at their discretion, requiring players to check for changes regularly. If players disagree with the revisions, they are expected to terminate the EULA, leading to the uninstallation and destruction of the game. Ubisoft's ongoing struggles, including underperforming titles like Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora and Star Wars Outlaws, have left the company in a difficult position. The company's recent subsidiary partnership with Tencent has added further uncertainty to the future of its games. With its focus shifting to a select few franchises, many Ubisoft properties are now in limbo, deepening concerns over the long-term availability of purchased titles. In response, the Stop Killing Games movement has gained momentum, with over one million signatures calling for the legality of game destruction to be challenged. Ubisoft's latest policy has sparked broader debates about digital ownership and the preservation of video games. The full EULA is now available on Ubisoft's website.
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
The 'Stop Killing Games' initiative responds to criticism of its movement from lobbying group Video Games Europe
AllBollywoodCelebscoopHollywoodOriginalsBinge Ross Scott of 'Stop Killing Games' has responded to Video Games Europe's criticisms. | Credit: X The 'Stop Killing Games' initiative has been gaining momentum since the end of June 2025, with the movement's European Citizens Initiative crossing 1 million signatures on July 3. The success of the movement has prompted a response from video game lobbying group, Video Games Europe. The industry group disagreed with the aims of the movement, claiming that 'Stop Killing Games' was ignoring the multifaceted nature of game development, and that implementing the initiative's proposals would make game development prohibitively expensive and increase the legal liability faced by publishers. As a result, 'Stop Killing Games' organizer Ross Scott released a response video where he addressed, and often debunked, many of the claims made by Video Games Europe. Ross Scott of 'Stop Killing Games' addresses industry lobby I think Video Games Europe making a PirateSoftware-tier flimsily reasoned statement against Stop Killing Games while having all these infamously anti-consumer companies directly involved with them says a lot. This is exactly why Stop Killing Games needs to succeed. — Rin | 凛 (@TheIshikawaRin) July 7, 2025 Ross Scott's video went over the statement released by Video Games Europe, and in doing so, he pointed out areas of agreement, and areas where he believed the industry group was being deceptive or misleading. Ross stated that if anything, this response from Video Games Europe meant that movement was actually having an impact. Ross was also unsurprised that Video Games Europe opposed the initiative, as he believed that the industry group was driven by business interests who did not care about game preservation and instead wanted to maximize their bottom line, unlike actual game developers and fans. When it came to Video Games Europe saying that publishers had a right to discontinue online games, Ross agreed. He simply wanted to give others the ability to archive discontinued or unsupported games. Later arguments from Video Games Europe, however, drew a harsher response as he believed they were made in bad faith. Ross pushes back on many of Video Games Europe's claims The first major claim Ross took issue with was the idea that game publishers would be held legally liable if they ever allowed third parties to modify their games. Ross had a hard time believing such an eventuality couldn't be addressed in an End User License Agreement (EULA). Another argument Ross argued against was the idea that developing online titles with the regulations 'Stop Killing Games' was suggesting would make the process prohibitively expensive. Ross pointed out that a lot of the expenses incurred in online game development were the result of incorporating micro-services and platform integrations that could be done away with without rendering the game unplayable. Ross also argued that since the proposed regulations wouldn't be retroactive, publishers could start reshaping their development roadmaps accordingly should any of the initiative's ideas be taken onboard. Ross ended his response by admitting that he wasn't necessarily trying to convince the lobbyists themselves, but rather the average player, who might get taken in by arguments that he believed were made in bad faith. For more news and updates from the world of OTT, and celebrities from Bollywood and Hollywood, keep reading Indiatimes Entertainment. First Published: Jul 08, 2025, 03:05 IST Pulak Kumar is an entertainment and current events writer who got his start with bylines in Sportskeeda and Koi Moi. He's immensely passionate about understanding and analyzing the latest happenings in Hollywood, anime, gaming and pop culture. Read More 8/7/2025 3:17:7
Time of India
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Epic Games Files Lawsuit Against Fortnite Cheat Developer
Image via Epic Games Fortnite developer Epic Games has filed a fresh lawsuit targeting a player accused of creating and distributing cheat software that offers unfair in-game advantages. The accused, Ediz Atas - known online as 'Sincey Cheats' and 'Vanta Cheats'—allegedly developed tools that let players see through walls and auto-aim at opponents. Epic claims cheating tools are harming game integrity Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, the lawsuit alleges that Atas has been selling these tools since January 2023. The software reportedly bypasses Epic's in-game anti-cheat mechanisms and violates the game's End User License Agreement (EULA). According to Epic, the cheating tools give players an unfair advantage and disrupt the gameplay experience for others. The company says that this has caused genuine players to abandon Fortnite, which in turn affects in-game purchases such as cosmetics, battle passes, and other content that form a major part of Epic's revenue model. Developer accused of posing as Epic employee The complaint goes further to accuse Atas of impersonating an Epic Games employee. The lawsuit claims that he sent emails to YouTube's copyright division, falsely claiming to represent Epic, in an attempt to reverse DMCA takedown notices that were aimed at cheat-related videos. Epic also noted that it has issued tens of thousands of bans to accounts using this software, with over 15,000 bans coming from users in the United States alone. The lawsuit targets not just Atas, but also five unnamed individuals who allegedly helped distribute the cheating software via Discord servers, websites, and Telegram channels. This is not the first time Epic Games has pursued legal action against cheaters. The company has previously taken strong measures against players violating competitive rules, including lifetime bans and public apologies. However, this new lawsuit highlights Epic's growing focus on developers and resellers of cheat software, which the company views as a significant threat to the game's ecosystem. Industry experts see this as part of a broader trend in the gaming world. Developers like Riot Games and Bungie have also filed lawsuits against cheat creators in recent years, sometimes winning multi-million dollar judgments. Despite occasional controversies, Fortnite continues to attract millions of players daily. With the arrival of Chapter 6 Season 3 and new collaborations like Star Wars, Epic seems keen to preserve the competitive integrity of the game—by any legal means necessary. Also Read: What is Supernova Gear in Fortnite and how to unlock It fast
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Who really owns your Switch 2? "It's-a-me!" suggests Nintendo
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The hype train barrels forward for the Nintendo Switch 2 as preorders continue to mount with the handheld console rapidly approaching its June 5 launch date. Given the astronomical success of the original Switch, which sold over 120 million units to date following its March 2017 release, expectations are sky-high regarding Nintendo's next-gen offering. However, while fans ponder performance, fantasize about frame rates, and rave over ray tracing, there's another side to the Switch's story: ownership itself. You may have spent 450 (or $499 if you opted for the MarioKart World Bundle) of your hard-earned dollars on a brand-new Switch 2 ahead of its launch, or you may be prepping yourself for a midnight release at your local brick-and-mortar. In your mind, the Switch 2 is already yours. And that might be the problem. According to a recently updated section of Nintendo's End User License Agreement (EULA), Switch 2 ownership might be all in your head. Preorder the Nintendo Switch 2 + MarioKart World Bundle for $499 at Best Buy. This bundle includes: a Nintendo Switch 2 Console, a full game download of Mario Kart World, a light blue Joy-Con 2, a light red Joy-Con 2 (R), a Nintendo Switch 2 AC adapter, a USB-C charging cable, a Nintendo Switch 2 Dock, a Joy-Con 2 Grip, 2 x Joy-Con 2 Straps, and an ultra high-speed HDMI cable. Key specs: 7.9-inch 1080p LCD touch screen, HDR support, up to 120 fps, TV dock supports 4K, GameChat, 256GB of storage, expandable via microSD Express Deal Saying Nintendo has always had a tumultuous relationship with issues of piracy, emulation, imitation, and modding is a bit like saying dynamite and sparks find each other slightly disagreeable. This is, after all, the company that attempted to sue a Costa Rican supermarket in January over trademark infringement, got multiple streamers banned for the unforgivable crime of playing a game they legally owned, and struck down the sale of custom-designed JoyCons in honor of popular, deceased YouTuber, Desmond 'Etika' Amofah. (And you can read many more instances here.) When it comes to obsessing over its brand, intellectual property, and the sanctity of its products, nobody does it quite like Nintendo. It has a vice-like grip on everything it produces. And you may find yourself wrestling with that same grip when it comes to the ownership of "your" Switch 2, as updated language in the company's EULA (as spotted by Game File's Stephen Totilo) suggests that Nintendo will be retaining its hold on the console, long after you've made your purchase. The updated agreement offers the usual legalese language to indicate Nintendo's disapproval of piracy, tampering, and modding of its console. As well as efforts to exploit Nintendo Account Services in any way. While the language is stricter, and clamps down tighter than before on any potential meddling, it's the end of the paragraph that should prick the ears of those interested in picking up a Switch 2 for themselves. It reads: "You acknowledge that if you fail to comply with the foregoing restrictions Nintendo may render the Nintendo Account Services and/or the applicable Nintendo device permanently unusable in whole or in part." Roughly translated: break the rules, and we're well within our rights to not just ban you from using Nintendo's online services, but we can also break your Switch 2 at will. Permanently. The Switch 2 may end up being Nintendo's biggest hardware launch to date, but the question of what it really means to own the handheld console may loom over that parade like a dark cloud. Yes, technically, this rule should only impact those ne'er-do-wells that hope to interfere with the Switch 2 in ways that the vast majority of owners won't. But if they've bought it, if they "own" it, do they not have the right to do with it as they see fit? It's a wider point than Nintendo preventing piracy, or the use of emulators and homebrew on its platform. In a time where we're routinely told that we don't actually own any of our games by various publishers, is the next step on that path being told that the hardware in our hands? Is just a very expensive lease that's only upheld on the grounds of you being a good boy/girl? If you're looking to hop aboard that Switch 2 hype train, just remember: toe the line, or Nintendo may remind you who has final say over what ownership of the upcoming console looks like. Spoiler: "It's-not-a-you!" The Switch 2 might not stay at its launch price. Nintendo explains why. The Nintendo Switch 2 has an Xbox-shaped problem, and we just got our first look at it Switch 2 is almost here, but a recent Switch update caused problems—here's how Nintendo responded
