According to Scott, in October, it seemed as though the EU was considering adding protections for videogames to the Digital Fairness Act, which is a new set of laws that aim to regulate digital ethics and consumer rights—however, it seems as though video game industry lobbyists had gotten to lawmakers first, since they parroted arguments about discouraging small indie developers, who would ostensibly have a hard time keeping games running indefinitely, but this allowed the movement to clarify to the EU that the movement doesn’t seek to force publishers to maintain games indefinitely, but only to provide a way for gamers to play the games they have purchased after support is ended. Despite this, the representatives at the meeting seemed to think that the commission didn’t favor adding laws surrounding gaming to the Digital Fairness Act.
Additionally, Scott addressed a draft non-binding communication that was briefly published in July 2025 that suggested the EU parliament would be encouraging the gaming industry to be more pro-consumer, but that it was aiming for “deregulation,” which effectively implies that the EU wanted game publishers and developers to self-regulate. According to original reports about the communication, the EU explained that it was incomplete, accidentally published early, and would be published sometime in 2026. All of this is to say that Stop Killing Games expects an uphill battle in its meeting with the EU Commission.
In a more positive note, Scott reports that Stop Killing Games has been receiving growing support in the EU Parliament itself, where it apparently has majority support. This means that even if the EU Citizen’s Initiative does not end up successful, new laws may be able to be put in place by the parliament itself. Stop Killing Games will also be launching two NGOs to promote, fund, and support the movement through actions like counter-lobbying, raising awareness, and researching other possible avenues to get legislation passed. One NGO will be started in the EU, and the other will be US-based, although it doesn’t seem as though either NGO has a name yet.
Scott also explains that, even if all of the EU and international initiatives to get legislation passed fail, there is still hope that Stop Killing Games could achieve its goals by getting the EU to enforce existing consumer protection laws. When the issue was previously brought to the EU Commission, the Commission stated that video game publishers and developers may be breaking the law when they pull support for their games or include clauses in their terms of use that allow them to pull support at their own discretion, but that these cases would have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. As Scott notes, this would create more work for EU courts, the gaming industry, and gamers themselves, and that each country would be able to apply their own interpretation of the law. As he explains, EU countries need clear laws and frameworks for how to handle situations in which games are shut down, which is something the SKG movement has yet to find in any EU country.