Only applicable if they run the servers themselves, not if they let others run their own servers.
Comment on The signatures are still coming and it's already making an impact
lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 1 week agoThe argument there is if a game is left online with no studio to care for it then they believe they would be liable for community content.
I don’t think it applies to offline games at all.
Natanael@infosec.pub 1 week ago
Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 week ago
If server code is released such that people can run private servers after the official servers are shut down, then legally the people running the servers should be the ones liable for illegal activity that happens on them.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
That kind of already exists, you can buy hosting for Minecraft and other games. AFAIK, moderation isn’t a part of it, but many private groups exist that run public servers and manage their own moderation. It exists already, and that should absolutely be brought up as a bill is being considered.
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 1 week ago
We have had that exact model for decades. Hosting companies use to and probably still offer rack space for arena shooters. The main company managed the master server, which was just a listing of IP addresses, but there were only ever a few official game servers with defaults loaded.
psud@aussie.zone 1 week ago
Minecraft has private servers (at least on Minecraft java) as well as their own server platform “Realms”, also every client is also a server. Though the authentication system is a Microsoft account so that’s likely to still be online well into the future
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
Yup, I run a Minecraft server at home, and it’s great. I’d love for more games to do the same.