US Bill Proposes Ownership Rights for Purchased Video Games

If you’ve ever bought a video game digitally, only to find it stops working years later because the publisher shut down the servers, you’ll understand exactly what this proposal is trying to fix. A US congressman has put forward legislation that would, if passed, give American gamers something they’ve long been asking for: the right to actually *own* what they pay for.

Representative Ritchie Torres of New York announced the proposed Power To The Players Act on 15 October 2026, calling on the Federal Trade Commission — the US consumer protection regulator — to create rules treating a purchased video game as the buyer’s property, not merely something they’ve been granted temporary permission to use.

What the Proposal Actually Says

The core idea is straightforward. When you buy a game, you should own it. Under the terms most publishers currently use, you’re not buying a game at all — you’re buying a licence to access it, which the publisher can revoke or effectively end by switching off the servers it depends on.

Meanwhile, the Power To The Players Act would change that, at least in the United States. Games with online functionality would need to offer an offline mode before their supporting servers are shut down. Consumers would also retain the right to keep, and in principle transfer, what they’ve purchased.

Torres has argued publicly that consumers deserve meaningful, lasting access to games they’ve paid for. That’s a position many players would find hard to argue with.

But — and this is worth being clear about — the legislation had not been formally introduced in Congress at the time of reporting. No bill number had been assigned, no published text was available, and no committee had taken it up. What Torres announced was a proposal, not a law. It still has a long road ahead before it could become enforceable.

Why This Matters Beyond the US

The way digital games are sold has quietly shifted over the past two decades. Physical discs gave way to downloads. Downloads came with licence agreements buried in pages of small print. And those licences often include clauses allowing publishers to withdraw access, remove features, or shut down online services entirely.

It’s happened repeatedly. Games have gone dark when studios closed or servers were switched off, leaving players with nothing — even when they paid full price. The industry’s standard defence is that ongoing server costs, intellectual property arrangements, and the complexity of live services make permanent access difficult to guarantee. That’s a real consideration. But critics say it doesn’t justify selling something as a purchase when it functions more like a rental.

Ritchie Torres, the bill’s sponsor, said the legislation was designed to ensure that players “retain meaningful ownership” of the games they buy. Whether Congress agrees nobody knows yet.

Where UK Law Currently Stands

The proposal concerns US federal regulation and would not automatically change anything for British consumers. Here in the UK, the legal picture is different — though not necessarily more reassuring for gamers.

That said, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 does apply to digital content, including video games. It sets out requirements for satisfactory quality, fitness for purpose, and conformity with the product’s description. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 adds further requirements around clear consumer information and prohibits misleading commercial practices.

So there is a legal framework. But UK law doesn’t currently create a general statutory right to keep, resell, or use a digital game indefinitely once a publisher withdraws support. The rights that exist are largely about quality and description at the point of sale, not about what happens years down the line when a company decides to pull the plug.

That gap between what consumers expect and what the law actually guarantees is precisely what the American proposal is trying to address — and it’s a gap that exists on this side of the Atlantic too.

A Proposal, Not Yet a Law

It’s easy to read announcements like this and assume something has changed. It hasn’t — not yet, and possibly not at all. The Power To The Players Act is a proposal from a single congressman. It would need to be formally introduced, assigned a bill number, referred to committee, debated, voted on, and signed into law before it changed anything. US legislative history is littered with well-intentioned proposals that never made it through that process.

What the announcement does do is put the issue back on the agenda. Consumer groups in both the US and UK have been pushing for clearer digital ownership rights for years. A formal legislative proposal — even an early-stage one — keeps that pressure alive.

What This Means for Kent Residents

The Power To The Players Act is a US proposal and would not change the legal position for anyone buying games in Kent. Local consumers purchasing titles from UK retailers or digital platforms such as Steam, PlayStation Network, or the Xbox store remain subject to UK consumer law and the terms set by each platform. If you’re concerned about your rights when a game stops working or a service shuts down, Kent Trading Standards and national consumer advice organisations such as Citizens Advice can offer guidance on what protections currently apply. Should the UK government ever consider similar ownership or offline-access rules — and there’s no confirmed plan to do so — it would be UK legislation, not this American bill, that would affect residents here.