Torres bill would make the FTC set an offline-mode rule for games that depend on servers
Rep. Ritchie Torres's Power to the Players Act would have the FTC require ownership on purchase and offline modes before server shutdowns. It is not formally introduced and is short on detail, TechSpot reports.
The Engineer · Build desk
The FTC would write ownership rules; server games would need an offline mode before shutdown; NBA 2K25 leaves stores October 30 and loses servers December 31; no major storefront allows resale; Microsoft and Ubisoft acted under pressure; the European Commission declined to legislate.
- Who has to decide decision FTC Would write rules so buying a video game means ownership, not a revocable license, claim 1
- What it limits constraint Server-dependent games Would have to offer an offline mode before their online servers are switched off, claim 2
- Who's exposed exposure NBA 2K25 buyers Leaves storefronts October 30, loses servers December 31; the modes most players bought it for go too, claim 4
- What it limits constraint Major digital storefronts A right to transfer implies a resale market for digital games, which no major storefront allows today, claim 12
- What it sets up precedent Microsoft and Ubisoft Under pressure, Microsoft allowed Forza Horizon 4 downloads; Ubisoft patched an offline mode into The Crew 2, claim 18
- Who has to decide decision European Commission Declined to propose legislation; offered to broker a voluntary code of conduct, claim 9
| Who | How | Kind | Claim |
|---|---|---|---|
| FTC | Would write rules so buying a video game means ownership, not a revocable license | decision | 1 |
| Server-dependent games | Would have to offer an offline mode before their online servers are switched off | constraint | 2 |
| NBA 2K25 buyers | Leaves storefronts October 30, loses servers December 31; the modes most players bought it for go too | exposure | 4 |
| Major digital storefronts | A right to transfer implies a resale market for digital games, which no major storefront allows today | constraint | 12 |
| Microsoft and Ubisoft | Under pressure, Microsoft allowed Forza Horizon 4 downloads; Ubisoft patched an offline mode into The Crew 2 | precedent | 18 |
| European Commission | Declined to propose legislation; offered to broker a voluntary code of conduct | decision | 9 |
What happened
- Torres frames the bill around three rights: to own, to play and to transfer the games people buy.
- His example is NBA 2K25, a $70 game that leaves digital storefronts on October 30 and loses its online servers on December 31, about two years after launch.
- In June the European Commission declined to propose legislation after the Stop Killing Games initiative passed 1.2 million signatures, and offered to broker a voluntary code of conduct.
Why it matters
- Who has to decide decision If the rule passes as described, studios planning a server-dependent title must settle at design time whether it can run without their own backend.
- What doesn't add up contradiction Publishers argue that licensed music, likenesses and car brands make keeping old games alive impossible. TechSpot counters that Microsoft restored Forza Horizon 4 downloads and Ubisoft patched an offline mode into The Crew 2 after pressure.
- What it sets up precedent The bill covers games only, but Torres hopes it sets a precedent for other digital purchases.
Next story · Product · 9h ago
Sony pulls the third OS upgrade it promised for the Xperia 10 VIConfirmed2 publishers
The bill hands the definitions to the FTC. It would direct the agency to write the rules [1], and TechSpot describes the proposal as short on detail [10]. TechSpot's account does not say what counts as an offline mode, how long before a shutdown it must ship, or whether it must cover the online modes that give a title its value. California's AB 1921 did set a number: 60 days' notice before a shutdown, plus a remedy of an offline mode, community-run servers or a full refund [8].
In our view the engineering question sits inside that missing definition. A server-dependent game makes its decisions on the publisher's machines: who is matched, what is unlocked, what a purchase grants. An offline mode has to move those decisions onto the player's machine. NBA 2K25 is the hard case. Its servers go dark on December 31, and TechSpot says the modes most players bought it for go with them [4]. 2K has argued that players never owned those online modes [7]. A rule that says only "offline mode" could be met by a build that leaves them out.
Ownership is a separate problem, and a legal one. The California act accepted the license model and dealt with end of life. Torres's bill goes after the license model itself [11]. A right to transfer implies a resale market for digital games, and no major storefront allows one today [12]. US courts have generally held that software sold under a license is outside the first-sale doctrine [13].
Torres told Kotaku in a phone interview that the bill is a "restoration to the historical norm" of the cartridge and disc era [14]. He put the ownership claim bluntly: "A game that can be taken away the moment a company pulls the plug is not a purchase. It is a rental disguised as a sale," Torres said [6].
The record on odds is thin and not encouraging. The bill has not been formally introduced [19], and the vast majority of bills never reach a floor vote [15]. The Entertainment Software Association lobbied against AB 1921 and called its requirements technically "unworkable" [16]. That bill stalled in a state Senate committee, three votes short [8]. At one point the association also told lawmakers that private Minecraft and Call of Duty servers amount to piracy, TechSpot says, even though Minecraft's own EULA allows them [17].
What to watch
- Formal introduction and the bill text: whether it defines an offline mode and sets a notice period before shutdown.
- Whether the Entertainment Software Association lobbies against this bill as it did against California's AB 1921.
- The December 31 shutdown of NBA 2K25's online servers, the example Torres's announcement leans on.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence55
- Adoption
- Not scored
- Hype gap+20
- Incentives55
- Confidence60
Perspective Coverage
3 publishers- Builder
- Builder 25%
- Operator
- Operator 45%
- Investor
- Investor 30%
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
The Power to the Players Act would direct the FTC to write rules ensuring that buying a video game translates into ownership and not a revocable license.
- [2]
Games that depend on online servers would also have to offer an offline mode before those servers are switched off.
- [3]
Rep. Ritchie Torres frames the bill around three rights: to own, to play, and to transfer the games people buy.
- [4]
NBA 2K25, which sold for $70 ($100 for the All-Star Edition), will be pulled from digital storefronts on October 30 and lose its online servers on December 31, roughly two years after launch; once the servers go, the modes most players bought it for go with them.
- [5]
The bill covers games only, not movies or music, though Torres hopes it sets a precedent for other digital purchases.
- [6]
"A game that can be taken away the moment a company pulls the plug is not a purchase. It is a rental disguised as a sale," Torres said.
- [7]
Much of NBA 2K's value lives in online modes that 2K has argued players never owned in the first place.
- [8]
California's Protect Our Games Act (AB 1921) stalled in a state Senate committee, three votes short; it would have required 60 days' notice before a shutdown plus a remedy: an offline mode, support for community-run servers, or a full refund.
- [9]
The Stop Killing Games initiative collected over 1.2 million signatures, but in June the European Commission declined to propose legislation and instead offered to broker a "voluntary code of conduct" with publishers.
- [10]
TechSpot describes the proposed bill as short on detail and long on obstacles.
- [11]
The failed California act accepted games' license model and focused on what happens at end of life; the Power to the Players Act goes after the license model itself.
- [12]
A right to transfer implies a resale market for digital games, something no major storefront allows today.
- [13]
US courts have generally held that software sold under a license isn't covered by the first-sale doctrine, the rule that lets you resell a used disc.
- [14]
In a phone interview with Kotaku, Torres described the bill as a "restoration to the historical norm" of the cartridge and disc era.
- [15]
The vast majority of bills never reach a floor vote.
- [16]
The Entertainment Software Association lobbied against AB 1921, calling the requirements technically "unworkable".
- [17]
The Entertainment Software Association at one point told lawmakers that private Minecraft and Call of Duty servers amount to piracy, even though Minecraft's own EULA allows for them.
- [18]
Publishers argue that licensed content like player likenesses, music and car brands makes keeping old games alive impossible, but TechSpot notes that pressure pushed Microsoft to allow Forza Horizon 4 downloads and play after delisting it, and Ubisoft eventually patched an offline mode into The Crew 2.
- [19]
The bill has not been formally introduced yet.
Sources
3 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.
- arstechnica.comUS Rep proposes bill to give video game buyers "ownership," not "a license"
1 article · October 16, 2026
- techspot.comNew proposed bill would make video games something you own, not rent
1 article · October 15, 2026
- tomshardware.comNew York rep announces game ownership bill that would require consumer ownership rather than sale of licenses
1 article · October 16, 2026
Topics and entities
Topics
- Video Game Ownership
- Digital Licensing
- Consumer protection regulation
- Game Preservation
Entities
- Stop Killing Games
- Entertainment Software Association
- Power to the Players Act
- Federal Trade Commission
- Ubisoft
- Sony