“It’s time to sue Sony,” game preservation advocates Stop Killing Games have declared, as the group throws its weight behind a Dutch lawsuit targeting the PlayStation Store’s alleged monopoly and “Sony Tax” on digital games.
While the case originated back in 2024, as part of an effort by Dutch consumer group Stichting Massaschade & Consument, the core complaint – that Sony wields monopoly power by only making digital PlayStation games available through its own store – has been compounded by the recent reveal that Sony plans to ditch physical games entirely in 2028, effectively cutting out its only source of competition. Allegedly. For Stop Killing Games, it’s also the latest in a string of non-preservation-specific causes the organisation have amplified, possibly indicating a widened advocacy mandate after failing its key goal of securing new European Commission legislation to keep discontinued games playable offline.
It’s time to sue Sony, join us
Watch on YouTube
Both Stop Killing Games and fellow preservation activists Does It Play? reposted a video by SM&C (above), arguing that Sony charging higher prices on the PlayStation Store than what the same games cost at physical retail constitutes an illegal act of moneygrubbing, and demanding that consumers in the Netherlands who paid those higher prices be refunded the excess.
I know that I know little enough about EU law to make a guess at this lawsuit’s chances, though I wouldn’t be surprised if the owners of digital PC stores are keeping an eye on how it plays out. Could Epic be sued if one of their Epic Store exclusives looks pricier than it should? Will Valve get sued because you can only buy a new Steam Machine or Steam Deck OLED or Half-Life: Alyx through Steam? Actually, daft question. Valve already get sued.
Either way, this is another instance – following their work opposing the UK’s proposed VPN ban and social media age verification plans – of Stop Killing Games spreading their attention beyond game preservation and ownership rights, and further into general consumer advocacy. Indeed, the lawsuit doesn’t appear to take issue with the availability and long-term accessibility of PlayStation Store games nearly as much as it does with effect on pricing, specifically.
The cynical view would be that Stop Killing Games are in need of a new raison d’être after that major European Commission setback, as well as the failure of an SKG-backed US bill – which would require game publishers to provide either refunds or an “alternate,” playable version for shut-down games – to clear the Californian state senate. It might also also be an incorrect one, as the group immediately vowed to continue seeking amendments to the European Commission’s Digital Fairness Act. The Stop Killing Games Xitter account also criticised Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick’s comments ongame streaming providing an alternative to high PC and component prices, noting how streaming involves the player owning neither their games nor the hardware they run on. Its original causes are still there, just huddled with other consumer concerns under a wider umbrella.
