“Bought Games Are Just Rentals?” How to Defend Your Rights When Publishers Shut Down Servers

A heated debate has erupted across European gaming communities as players protest that “purchased” games function like rentals—publishers can terminate services without compensation. Similar frustrations over game shutdowns plague Chinese players. What legal protections exist when games go offline, accounts get banned, or recharge disputes arise? On July 30, Huang Qianqian, a senior partner at Sichuan Discovery Law Firm, addressed these issues.

⚖️ Virtual Property Rights: Legally Protected

Huang confirms Chinese courts consistently recognize:

  • Player-platform relationships as contractual, protected by Consumer Rights Protection Law (e.g., NetEase-Blizzard Shutdown CaseTencent Q Coin Case).
  • Virtual items (accounts, skins, rare gear, currency) acquired through time/money investment qualify as “online virtual property” under Civil Code Article 127, possessing economic value and legal protection.

🛡️ Legal Recourse—With Caveats

Players may claim rights against operators under the Civil Code and Consumer Law, but:
⚠️ Key challenges include:

  • Platform rules/user agreements limiting rights
  • No unified standards for valuing virtual assets
  • Difficulty proving losses (e.g., screenshots alone may be insufficient)
  • “Emotional value” rarely recognized as compensable loss

📋 Self-Protection Checklist

Huang advises players to:

  1. Choose reputable platforms/developers
  2. Scrutinize user agreements (focusing on shutdown terms, compensation, refunds)
  3. Preserve evidence:
    • Recharge records 📝
    • Virtual asset inventories 🎮
    • Service termination notices ⚠️
    • Customer service logs 💬
  4. Document data proactively (screenshot/record when disputes arise)
  5. Demand reasonably—avoid illegal actions

🏛️ Systemic Solutions Needed

Huang calls for multi-stakeholder collaboration:

  • Legislation: Special laws for virtual property
  • Regulation: Mandate advance shutdown notices + fair compensation standards
  • Industry: Developer self-regulation + transparent data management
  • Courts: Shift burden of proof—operators must:
    • Backup game data 🔒
    • Provide consumption records upon request 📊
    • Not arbitrarily delete evidence 🚫

“Platforms holding all data creates an uneven battlefield. Players deserve accessible justice.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *