A demand for redress, rather than a vague anxiety about technology, carried the room: Yes won 435 votes to 42. The decisive argument was not simply that access can disappear, but that consumers should not bear the cost when it does.
The floor’s most-respected Yes case put the remedy bluntly: suppliers should “immediately refund the original access payment”. Other Yes voters widened that principle from subscriptions to lost information, photographs and content, while “Stop Killing Games!” supplied the debate’s briskest slogan; the Stadia closure was offered as evidence that refunds can set a workable precedent.
The No side was smaller and quieter, but its best-rated objection went to enforcement rather than principle: “Try enforcing the laws on the book before writing any more”. A second No voice called the proposal a “Minefield!!”, leaving the two camps talking past each other — Yes asking what protection should exist when access is withdrawn, No asking whether existing protection is being used.
The wider finding is that voters treated digital ownership as more than a consumer-services issue. One Yes voice warned that “Changing the past never was so easy”, while another folded the argument into distrust of government, saying there was “nobody serious in government currently”; the room’s concern was therefore both practical and institutional.
The verdict favoured a right to compensation when the digital world takes something back.
8 Opinions
Any digital supplier that removes access to something should immediately refund the original access payment, at the very least.
This axiomatic as our current crop of MPs & the Civil Service is more interested in agglomerating power & benefits than running the country. There is nobody serious in government currently so let’s not hold our breath. Any government that can promote Angela Raynor will not protect our rights.
Try enforcing the laws on the book before writing any more
Yes. And Google is a great use-case for this. They previously launched Stadia, an online subscription model for their Chromecast. They retired it after about 3-4 years, and refunded users every single purchase they were losing access to. And I'm fairly certain part of the actual subscription price too. That set a decent precedent for best practice and I think all online providers that offer digital purchase should follow the same process if they decided to remove access.
There is always a risk that access can be removed, accidentally or on purpose. If access is removed to something we rely on, are dependent on there must be full recompense, this includes .money we have lost, information lost, graphics, photos etc.
Stop Killing Games!
Digital era, great for all tyrannies. Changing the past never was so easy. It's not just access that needs to be protected, content as well.
Minefield!!