ESA Labels Community Servers as “Piracy”
The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has declared private, community-run video game servers to be “illegal” and a form of “piracy.” The assertion came during a California State Senate hearing for the “Stop Killing Games” movement, triggering immediate backlash from advocates who view these servers as a standard, publisher-sanctioned method for preserving game access.
The “Protect Our Games Act” Confrontation
At the center of the dispute is CA AB 1921, or the “Protect Our Games Act,” which seeks to ensure titles remain playable after official servers are shuttered. Jennifer Gibbons, the ESA’s Vice President of State Government Affairs, testified that these private, third-party servers infringe upon intellectual property rights. She argued that such environments operate outside of publisher oversight, bypassing established trust and safety standards.
Gibbons characterized these private instances as a “black market” for software. She confirmed that the organization currently has two pending lawsuits against private server operators, maintaining that labeling these servers as a legitimate preservation tool undermines a publisher’s right to control its own IP.
The Microsoft Discrepancy
The ESA’s broad stance faces significant scrutiny when applied to titles like Minecraft. While Gibbons suggested that private servers are inherently unauthorized, Microsoft—the owner of Minecraft—explicitly supports them. The official Minecraft website provides a dedicated server list and hosting guidelines, with servers reviewed to ensure they align with community standards.
When questioned about this contradiction, an ESA representative maintained that private servers remain an infringement on IP rights, regardless of whether a specific publisher chooses to permit them in practice.
Lobbying Tactics Under Fire
The “Stop Killing Games” movement dismissed the ESA’s testimony as a calculated lobbying tactic. A volunteer for the campaign stated on Reddit that the ESA’s claims were designed to influence legislators unfamiliar with the technical realities of community-run infrastructure.
Although CA AB 1921 failed to secure enough votes to move forward in its current session, it has been granted reconsideration. Campaign organizers are already preparing to return in the next legislative session, promising increased funding and broader support from developers and players to counter industry arguments.
Summary of the Legislative Dispute
- The Legislation: CA AB 1921, the “Protect Our Games Act,” seeks to mandate that publishers provide a way for games to remain playable after official servers are deactivated.
- The ESA Position: The association argues that private servers are unauthorized, pose safety risks to players, and violate intellectual property protections.
- Industry Precedent: While the ESA cited the U.S. Trade Representative’s “Notorious Markets Report” regarding piracy, reports from outlets like PC Gamer note that such listings typically target servers that bypass subscription services or facilitate unauthorized distribution, rather than community-run servers that extend the life of legitimate game copies.
- Future Outlook: The bill remains eligible for reconsideration, and proponents have vowed to increase their in-person lobbying efforts during future sessions.