The EU petition has already reached the threshold in 6 (out of 7 necessary) countries. Belgium and Ireland are closest to be next.
The total amount of signatures needed is still huge, though - only 35% of the way there.

Reminder that the European Pirate Party and several other pirate parties (German, Greek, Dutch, Frisian pirates plus Razem/Left Together in Poland) have endorsed this Initiative, and to get EU citizens (who can sign regardless of where they live) to sign and share!

It needs more energy and coverage, since it only gets ~200 signatures per day when we need 2500!

Stop Killing Games: UK Edition

"The UK government petition to stop publishers destroying games is now open! You can sign here if you're a UK citizen or resident:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702074/

https://stopkillinggames.com
"

This feels more relevant than ever.

Why is GOG launching a "make games live forever" campaign and not backing this initiative?

There are games that are disappearing right now, which no one will get to play because of predatory business strategies.

EDIT: adding more info

Stop Killing Games - European Citizens' Initiative (EU petition)

Stop Killing Games video - presentation and call to action.

Stop Killing Games FAQ

Stop Killing Games - video FAQ

We need this to be seen more, need some big youtubers (Or alot youtubers with a good number of followers.) to talk about this more.

As I was pointing out in the other thread, this initiative specifically says that DRM, and in fact on-line DRM specifically, is completely fine. And GOG's primary (and sole remaining original) pillar/value is no DRM (for singleplayer... mostly...), so I'd ask how could they back it?

Small update on that on GameSpot, can't find the link now...

Dead Game News: UK Petition Non-Answer

"The UK Government has responded and it's not clear they if even read the petition + they copied / pasted an answer already rejected by the Petitions Committee. Sign the petition here if you're a UK citizen or resident to bypass the obstruction and take it straight to Parliament:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702074/

0:00 Intro / short explanation
2:11 Detailed explanation
13:06 Summary + general outlook

Link to graphic comparing old and new answer:
https://imgur.com/a/XKNNdSN

https://stopkillinggames.com
"

No, that goes against what Ross has said on what the Initiative would cover
From the Stop Killing Games website: "Our proposal would do the following:
Require video games sold to remain in a working state when support ends.
Require no connections to the publisher after support ends.
Not interfere with any business practices while a game is still being supported."

Plus, GOG has covered Ross on their podcast with him talking about this before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB4Ib9BtPM4&list=PLheQeINBJzWaKyqwEEuRIlnDoDMMvQ0rb&index=2

How is this Initiative incompatible with GOG's DRM-free mission? It's aligned, from what I can see!

Ross talks about this including DRM: https://youtu.be/w70Xc9CStoE?list=PLheQeINBJzWa6RmeCpWwu0KRHAidNFVTB&t=701

And look, Stop Killing Games is right here!!!: https://youtu.be/R8UHWH_FOc4?t=479

More against DRM, especially at end-of-life: https://youtu.be/tUAX0gnZ3Nw?list=PLheQeINBJzWa6RmeCpWwu0KRHAidNFVTB&t=1396

I'll just repost a part of what you yourself just quoted:
And see screenshot from the initiative's annex text, which I also quoted in the other thread.
The initiative is about what happens with what's basically abandonware, which is obviously not the case of games legally sold anywhere, including on GOG, during which time the text literally says that connection requirements are perfectly fine.

Only AFTER support ends. Literally says right there that the petition requires "absolutely nothing" while the game is supported.

"Whilst the game is being supported, any game, absolutely nothing would happen. Companies can do whatever they want."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w70Xc9CStoE&t=671s

"...This is known as Digital Rights Management of DRM. Now That's reasonable whilst the product is still being sold..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUAX0gnZ3Nw&t=1396s

Honestly, the more I watch, the more clueless he sounds about game development and DRM. The time to start planning some offline mode in a cloud-only by-design game is precisely whilst it's still being developed and supported (eg, placing "alternative hooks" that can read content locally instead of from the cloud), and the time to do a DRM-Free release is before support ends whilst any time-limited licensed content is still under license. If enough of The Crew's fanbase had said back in 2014 "Looks good, but no offline mode = no buy" they'd still be playing it today. Ross sounds like the kind of person who thinks you can spend a decade making any game as online centric as possible, then expects a 1kb "NoCD" patch to 'simply' make everything run offline 11 years later in the space of a day. That's not remotely how many online-centric games work.

UK Govt's response has already clarified (twice) there's no law at all that forces any game dev to go back and rewrite half the code in 10 year old games (Ross's entire argument) but rather the only possible avenue of redress is advertising standards, ie, at best a new law might be passed forcing a bright red warning label on digital game stores on the purchase page warning "Warning: This game requires an Internet connection for all game modes. Content may become unavailable after a certain time". You might see more of that, but that's it. No-one's going to force Ubisoft to rewrite 11 year old cloud-centric The Crew to be offline today. So his "plan" of being completely happy with as much DRM as possible (hardly a DRM-Free advocate) "whilst its being sold" and somehow getting governments to force developers to remove it post-sale is already dead. The biggest value Stop Killing Games has is at least waking some people who claim to hate the same companies they continue to throw vast sums of money at every into perhaps engaging in a little more self-reflection at time of purchase.

If you're genuinely serious about Game Preservation, then DRM-Free is the right battle to fight but The Crew is absolutely the wrong hill to die on. Likewise, his whole premise of "Game Preservation = stuffing a game full of online-only DRM then worrying about it only 10 years later" fails hard vs game developers who can simply go out of business long before that. Desperados 3, Shadow Tactics, Shadow Gambit, etc, are "Preserved" precisely because we had DRM-Free versions before the developer closed up shop, not stuffed it full of Denuvo then waited 10 years until there was no-one left for any government to threaten into removing it...