Maybe or maybe not, if the law states that you need to keep the game in a functional state then yes you do.
I give you 99.9% chance there will be no such law. Would initiative get enough votes or not. The current state is that it's all some wild fantasies of lunatics.
There is a very long way between some "petition online" and actual legislation. And legislation, unlike some forum fantasies, should take into account interests of all sides, so it will be a hard uphill battle to pass this through.
Product selling is also an understandable
For data privacy there quite some "greater good" concerns those are reasons why there impediment and restrictions on companies applied.
There are no such things in game preservation. You will not die if you would not be able play a game
You were paid, 69.99€ or more at the time of purchase.
No. 69.99 only cover what it's stated to be included. Arbitrary including extras in the package is not what you paid for.
It's okay that your company went under, it frees up space for more pro consumer companies and games... see how this is dumb?
It's really ok, I doesn't really care about job security, I have enough connections for this to be non-issue. And one of my former place did actually went under - if you are a good professional it's not a big deal.
You are not entitled to have a functional product forever. You are entitled to have a product that work as is on the exact hardware specification for which it was released on, and nothing more. Nobody is asking for the Super Mario World cartridge to work on the Switch 2, but sure as hell people expect it to work on the SNES, as long as the hardware has not naturally failed. Nobody is asking for updates. Nobody is asking for compatibility patches. Nobody is asking for indefinite developer support. What is expected is the bare minimum: that the game runs in some capacity.
This is double standards here. Why dev should support games indefinitely and OS maker not? It's a huge law loophole.
GDRP is not just "data privacy". It was a huge shift in paradigm where the user was put in control of their data. It was much bigger than this campaign for sure. Literally every service working in Europe had to implement this in some capacity. Not sure why you are downplaying this and overstating the complexity of this campaign, which has a very clear and simple message.
It is about data privacy, all the rest is implementation of it.
4) Games with a subscription model like Wow or FF14 are not part of this discussion because they are not mis selling anything. They state clearly upfront what you are getting for your money. The same cannot be said for plenty of other titles that have viable single player modes that were made inaccessible due to online requirements after a server shut down. Fallout 3 had an issue for a long time because it used games for windows live as DRM and then MS turned off the servers so an entirely SP title was rendered unusable until it was later patched.
They are the point of discussion, they even included in FAQ for this initiative specifically.
And If subscription MMO can stop support making game dead, F2P MMO can it too. And if F2P MMO can do it, any F2P online game can. And it'll be very hard to force b2p games as only exception.