Ubisoft claims that players do not own their games following The Crew lawsuit

Ubisoft claims players only license, not own, their digital games after The Crew's server shutdown sparks a lawsuit.

: Ubisoft, after shutting down servers for The Crew, faces a lawsuit from California plaintiffs over the concept of game ownership. Ubisoft's defense claims players hold a temporary license, not ownership, and mentions the expiration of the statute of limitations. The plaintiffs counter with arguments about in-game currency and claims related to activation code validity and statutory time frames. The situation has rekindled calls for legislative changes to protect digital game consumers when titles reach end-of-life status.

The recent legal dispute involving Ubisoft provides a critical look at the concept of ownership in digital gaming. The lawsuit, which emerged after the shutdown of The Crew's servers, brings into focus the recurring issue of whether consumers truly own their digital games or merely possess a license to play them. Many in the gaming community perceived Ubisoft's actions as a breach of trust, mainly because the practice of revoking access to paid games once delisted is relatively rare.

Ubisoft's action drew significant criticism because, typically, even after a game's servers are decommissioned, players can still access and play the offline modes or retain some functionality if they own a physical copy. However, in The Crew's case, the shutdown rendered even physically owned copies unplayable as they resorted to a limited demo mode, leaving consumers in an unprecedented situation.

Plaintiffs in California argue that Ubisoft misled buyers, insisting that they were not informed of such potential future restrictions at purchase. The plaintiffs highlight that other games in similar situations have leaned towards consumer-friendly practices by enabling offline access post server shutdown. Ubisoft defends its approach by asserting that game packaging clearly indicates customers are purchasing a temporary license.

The implications of this legal conflict extend beyond Ubisoft and touch upon broader consumer protection issues in the digital marketplace. A movement is gaining traction, aiming for legislative changes that require gaming companies to modify their End User License Agreements. This would protect consumers when games reach the end-of-life phase and remove the possibility of losing access upon a server shutdown.

This ongoing case may set a precedent for how digital assets are managed, impacting industry standards and consumer rights. Valve, acknowledging the potential legal precedence, has started adjusting its communication by emphasizing that purchases are a licensing agreement, not ownership. GOG remains on the other side of the debate, promoting its DRM-free, offline installer policy as a consumer-friendly alternative.

Sources: TechSpot, Daniel Sims

LegalgamingSoftware