Should EU law force game makers to disclose lifespan and refund players for early shutdowns?

► President
We are opening on the fair treatment of consumers who buy video games. The question is whether existing EU consumer law already requires lifespan disclosure and reimbursement on early shutdown, or whether we need a dedicated instrument. Portfolio views, please.

► Commissioner · Justice & Consumers
Much of this is already law. The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive bars misleading omissions, so failing to tell a buyer a game can be switched off is arguably already actionable. The Digital Content Directive 2019/770 governs continuous supply of digital content and gives conformity and remedy rights. My read: enforce first, legislate only for the gaps.
[EUR-Lex — verify Directive (EU) 2019/770 scope]

► Commissioner · Internal Market
Fragmentation is the real risk. If member states each define 'lifespan disclosure' differently, publishers face 27 compliance regimes and the single market for games splinters. Whatever we do, it should be a maximum-harmonisation standard so a game sold in Dublin and Lisbon carries the same promise.

► VP · Digital
We must define the object precisely. A single-player game that ships complete is not a live-service game that depends on the publisher's servers. The reimbursement duty should bite where continued play depends on a service the provider can unilaterally end — not punish a studio whose offline game simply ages.

► Commissioner · Economy
Reimbursement mechanics need care. Full refunds years after purchase would be disproportionate and could chill the live-service model that funds ongoing content. A pro-rata remedy keyed to the disclosed lifespan, or a defined minimum support period, is more proportionate and still protects the consumer.

► Legal Service
Legal basis is sound: Art. 114 TFEU, consumer protection under Art. 169 TFEU as context. My advice is to amend the Consumer Rights Directive's pre-contractual information duties to add an explicit lifespan-and-shutdown disclosure, rather than create a standalone act. Add a proportionality recital tying any refund to the disclosed support period.
[EUR-Lex — verify Directive 2011/83/EU information duties]

► President
College position: confirm that lifespan disclosure and reimbursement for early shutdown already follow from existing consumer law, prioritise enforcement and CPC guidance, and table a targeted amendment to the Consumer Rights Directive for live-service games with a pro-rata refund tied to the disclosed support period. Legal Service to confirm the treaty base within 15 working days.

Deliberation closed · 7 positions recorded