The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) was dealt an utter blow from video game non-profit Stop Killing Games after entering California’s turf. California Assembly member Christopher Ward has cooperated with SKG’s US branch representative, Jonah Goldman, and lead co-organizer Ross Scott for the Protect Our Games Act (POG/AB 1921) since February 2026.
The entertainment foundation warned the state’s legislation that if this bill were to be voted forward, the shutdown process for online games would be more difficult for developers in the future. After multiple hearings, AB 1921 has been revised and passed the California Assembly on May 27. As the POG Act awaits its review in the Senate, here’s why the ESA failed to suppress it.
The ESA Rejects Protect Our Games for “Latest Industry Standards”
Similar to its European counterpart, Video Games Europe, the ESA viewed Ward’s Protect Our Games Act as a threat to online service video game providers. Stop Killing Games supported the bill, as the California assemblymember has been actively pushing for media preservation, including video games.
When the non-profit informed him about the conflicting business practices involved in deleting owned digital purchases, such as Ubisoft’s The Crew, Ward drafted AB 1921. The POG Act’s purpose is to mandate game studios to inform their consumers 2 months in advance and thoroughly explain the terms of the shutdown process.
The California bill proposes the same protections as SKG’s Digital Fairness Act update, which pushes for consumers’ ownership rights. The ESA argued that preserving an online game for offline is more expensive than creating a new game.
ABC 10 published the foundation’s official response to Ward on May 7: “Many games depend on evolving technology, licensed content, and online systems that changed over time. [The Protect Our Games Act] could force developers to spend limited time and resources keeping old systems running instead of creating new games, features, and technology.
In the end, the policy doesn’t reflect how games actually work today. This bill sets strict rules that could ultimately mean fewer new and innovative experiences for players.”
Ward disagreed, saying, “We’re really for Californian consumers trying to be able to draw that line about the anticipation of what they got when they signed up for something at a significant cost to themselves, I might add, and [the gaming industry’s ability to provide the alternative options] to make sure it’s there. It’s a fairness question.”
How Chris Ward Got POG to Reach the California Senate
Ward negotiated with the California legislators throughout May for the necessary revisions to AB 1921. Before the first hearing on May 6, the ESA sent a floor alert to the Assembly, highlighting the bill’s flaws in hopes of halting it indefinitely.
VGE attempted similar tactics against Stop Killing Games in July 2025 with their End-User License Agreement. The lobby members from Ubisoft retaliated against their petition, with Section 8 stating the consumer will have their digital game copy terminated if they fail to provide proof of purchase or refuse to have their memory monitored in case of cheat modifications.
On May 14, on the second hearing, Ward made progress by defining the circumstances for all developers. The ‘Protect Our Games’ Act’s policy will apply to digital games or those providing an online service on Jan. 1, 2027. Article 20662, Section 1, Part C, requires game studios to keep track of substantial player activity (ordinary use). This is understandable as online services are expected to be used daily or weekly.
The 60-day shutdown notification has expanded the developer’s communication methods. Article 20664, Section 2, Part A & B, offers two options for players to receive an end-of-service version of their game. The developer can choose A for an independent online server with an operator, while B gives players the option for an offline version.
However, the following does not apply to digital games that contribute to subscription-based services, have a permanent offline mode after publication, and can be played for free. Other exemptions include short-term games, such as Concord, which only lasted for 12 days. AB 1921 was amended and later passed the Assembly on May 27.
