- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
You could make a Libertarian argument against Stop Killing Games. The only problem is, it would be retarded and missing the point. "Oh no! They're trying to get the government to regulate what we can do with our private property!" might sound good on a surface level if you don't think about it, but the problem is: the entire reason this problem happened in the first place was because of state regulation.
Specifically, all the protection around Copyright Law and Intellectual Property. The government gives extraordinary power to corporations to punish and enforce their copyrights with the kind of authority and heavy-handedness usually reserved for governmental agencies. If laws were more reasonable, people could more safely and easily host their own dedicated servers and unofficial rebuilds for defunct games, theoretically even with extra financial backing. But they can't, because even if a game is abandoned it's still mostly considered the property of the creators. People can still do it, but its harder and has more risks involved.
Therefore, partitioning the government to adjust its regulations according to the unique needs of the situation they create is a reasonable ask.
Specifically, all the protection around Copyright Law and Intellectual Property. The government gives extraordinary power to corporations to punish and enforce their copyrights with the kind of authority and heavy-handedness usually reserved for governmental agencies. If laws were more reasonable, people could more safely and easily host their own dedicated servers and unofficial rebuilds for defunct games, theoretically even with extra financial backing. But they can't, because even if a game is abandoned it's still mostly considered the property of the creators. People can still do it, but its harder and has more risks involved.
Therefore, partitioning the government to adjust its regulations according to the unique needs of the situation they create is a reasonable ask.