Proposal for Comprehensive Game Ownership, Data Transparency, and Fair DRM Practices

[Brandon]

I am not good at typing reports or proposals, so I will not deny that I used an AI to help me get my confused and convoluted idea's onto paper. But beyond that, the proposed idea is my own thoughts and creation and I feel this is something the game industry greatly needs to do. For too long corporate greed has dictated user experiences and I feel this needs to stop. My idea is listed below. While I'm sure I'm not the first to have these idea's and thoughts, I figured putting together a proposal with potential benefits might help push this a little closer towards potentially happening, even if that potential remains very low. Got to keep expectations realistic right? anyway please enjoy reading.


**Abstract**
This proposal outlines a structured plan to transform the digital gaming industry into a more user-centric environment. By enforcing clear ownership rights, transparent data collection practices, fair and secure anti-cheat measures, and sustainable DRM policies, platforms like Steam can set a new standard in consumer trust and industry ethics. The plan includes practical incentives for early adoption and structured policies that safeguard user rights while supporting developer needs.

**Introduction**
The digital gaming landscape has evolved significantly over the past two decades. While this evolution has brought innovation, it has also led to practices that undermine user trust, such as restrictive licensing models, invasive data collection, and aggressive DRM (Digital Rights Management). This proposal presents a comprehensive framework aimed at creating a balanced ecosystem where gamers’ rights are protected, developers are supported, and platforms are positioned as leaders in ethical digital distribution.

**Core Objectives**
1. Transition from a “license-to-play” model to true game ownership.
2. Implement transparent, user-friendly data collection practices.
3. Ensure fair and safe anti-cheat measures.
4. Introduce a structured DRM policy with an end-of-life (EOL) contingency.
5. Create incentives for early adoption by developers.

**1. Game Ownership Reform**
**Current Challenges**: The existing model in many digital stores grants users only a license to play games, which can be revoked or rendered void due to publisher decisions, server shutdowns, or changes in policy. This leaves consumers without long-term access to their purchases.

**Proposed Change**: Digital platforms should shift to a model where once a game is purchased, the user owns that copy indefinitely. Publishers may choose to pull a game from sale, but previously purchased copies must remain in users’ libraries and be downloadable. Additionally, if download access is ever discontinued, users must be allowed to install backup copies that can be reactivated using their platform account.

**DRM Removal Requirement**: If a publisher decides to end support or discontinue DRM servers, they must release an update to remove DRM from existing copies. This update ensures the user’s perpetual access to their purchase and supports game preservation. To facilitate this, a DRM unlock tool must be provided when the game is initially listed but kept in cold storage until needed.

**2. Transparent Data Collection Practices**
**Current Challenges**: Data collection practices are often buried in complex terms of service agreements that few users read or understand. This leads to mistrust and non-compliance with privacy laws.

**Proposed Change**: Developers must provide clear and concise explanations of any data collected, its purpose, and how it will be used. Users must explicitly agree to each data collection point, ensuring that permissions are straightforward and specific. Data collection should never be mandatory for playing a game, except for basic account login data needed to enforce bans or restrictions in cases of cheating.

**User Control**: Users should have the ability to opt out of non-essential data collection without losing access to gameplay.

**3. Fair and Safe Anti-Cheat Measures**
**Current Challenges**: Modern anti-cheat tools often involve invasive software running at the kernel level, posing significant security risks and violating user trust.

**Proposed Change**: Anti-cheat tools should only monitor online play and should never operate at the kernel level. Data collected for anti-cheat purposes should be anonymized and used solely for detecting cheating tools and patterns. Updates to anti-cheat definitions should be downloaded locally, allowing tools to function without transmitting user-specific data.

**User-Friendly Implementation**: Players must be informed of what anti-cheat measures are being used, and data must be processed locally to avoid privacy breaches. Offline single-player modes should be exempt from anti-cheat monitoring.

**Cloudstrike Incident and Microsoft’s Kernel Access Push**: Recent incidents, such as the Cloudstrike issue with Windows, have demonstrated the dangers of kernel-level access by third-party tools. This high-profile failure underscored significant risks to system stability and security, likely motivating Microsoft’s push to close kernel access to third-party applications. Such a move would immediately render kernel-level DRM and anti-cheat tools inoperable, potentially locking users out of their games. This proposal mitigates these risks by prohibiting kernel-level tools, ensuring long-term game access and system security.

**4. Structured DRM Policy and EOL Contingency**
**Current Challenges**: DRM systems often prevent users from accessing their purchased games if servers go offline or a game is discontinued. This leads to frustration and a loss of trust in digital platforms.

**Proposed Change**:
- **DRM Stability**: DRM must be stable, reliable, and not overly restrictive. It should not require constant online connectivity unless the game is inherently online-only.
- **DRM Unlock Tools**: Publishers must upload a DRM unlock tool when submitting a game to the platform. This tool will remain in cold storage, only accessible when a game reaches EOL or the DRM server is shut down for more than 30 days.
- **DRM Replacement by Platform**: If a DRM server outage extends beyond 7 business days or if repeated outages or failures disrupt gameplay, Steam will replace the publisher’s DRM with its own platform DRM. This temporary DRM will ensure continued user access and remain in place until the publisher proves that the original issue has been resolved. Steam’s DRM will stay active as long as the game is on the market and Steam is in operation. Only when a game reaches EOL and is no longer for sale will the DRM be fully removed.
- **Enforcement**: If a publisher does not comply, their game will be delisted until they meet the requirement. Users should still retain access to previously purchased copies, and failure to maintain access could result in mandatory refunds at the publisher’s expense.

**5. Incentives for Early Adoption**
**Proposed Strategy**:
- **Transition Period**: A two-year window for developers to align with these policies, during which early adopters will receive reduced platform fees. The earlier a developer complies, the greater the discount they receive.
- **Publisher Benefits**: Early adopters will benefit from platform promotion, visibility, and potential consumer goodwill.
- **Financial Repercussions**: Developers who fail to meet these standards by the deadline will face game suspension until compliance is achieved.

**Conclusion**
This proposal seeks to create a gaming ecosystem where user rights are respected, data practices are transparent, and DRM policies are fair and future-proof. By implementing these changes, platforms like Steam can reinforce their position as leaders in ethical digital distribution, benefiting users, developers, and the gaming community as a whole. This approach builds trust, encourages responsible publishing practices, and ensures a sustainable and positive gaming experience for everyone involved.

[Mad Scientist]

The only way to get basically any of this is to petition a country to make laws in regard to this stuff since this is all the Developers choice for how direct to make some information, the anticheat they use, etc.

Valve does not make laws, they only make contracts and Devs are free to operate their games however they please. EOL and DRM is something a Developer should plan for, but is not required to remove upon EOL/server shutdowns.

Originally posted by Brandon:

- **Financial Repercussions**: Developers who fail to meet these standards by the deadline will face game suspension until compliance is achieved.

Honestly seems a little fascist to suggest their products will be suspended for not adhering the whims of individuals. This is the sort of thing Valve knows not to do; more Dev freedom and personal choice is great for business. Being hands-off is great for business, unless they absolutely have to get involved if necessary. They know if they started making demands/mandatory stuff, Developers would go elsewhere.

[HikariLight]

Steam has no authority to do any of that.
Steam is a STOREFRONT.
You will NEVER own the rights to the game, as the rights to the game(the IP) are exclusive property of the Developers/Publishers.
If a game hits it's EOL, the devs/pubs have full control of what happens. If they don't want player run servers, that is the dev/pubs LEGAL RIGHT.
We ONLY get a LICENSE that allows us to play, we have no other control over how the game is managed beyond what the devs/pubs allow us to do.

Go learn how Intellectual Property Ownership laws work.

[Brandon]

I am well aware of both of your comments, and I'll be honest, I don't expect any such things to be done. I'm well aware it'll take more than just steam putting their foot down to pull this off. But idea's must start somewhere. If you notice, this was never a steam must do this message, but rather a proposal of some idea's that perhaps might one day go somewhere. I do appreciate your comments though. I hope one day we'll see things be done more fairly. Please don't misunderstand me and think I'm blaming steam or thinking they should be on the hook for fixing all of this. the proposal was more general than that and isn't targeted purely at steam.

[Mad Scientist]

Originally posted by Brandon:

I am well aware of both of your comments, and I'll be honest, I don't expect any such things to be done. I'm well aware it'll take more than just steam putting their foot down to pull this off. But idea's must start somewhere. If you notice, this was never a steam must do this message, but rather a proposal of some idea's that perhaps might one day go somewhere. I do appreciate your comments though. I hope one day we'll see things be done more fairly. Please don't misunderstand me and think I'm blaming steam or thinking they should be on the hook for fixing all of this. the proposal was more general than that and isn't targeted purely at steam.

Anti-cheats are already fair because they ban people that are using cheats.

Game ownership is basically you permanently can download the game from anywhere, on any machine capable of running Steam - unless you get your account terminated by doing grossly unlawful stuff or other high offenses on Steam. It's been like that since the days of CDs and dial-up downloads.

DRM and EOL, I do get behind Devs should remove drm / give dedicated server apps as a gesture of goodwill, mandating it I'm not sure I'm for, but any Dev worth anything will offer up things should they ever close their business or otherwise end support for a game / declare it as EOL.

The issue is when we go from basic good-will gestures to mandating by law, I am less for mandating so much as Devs should really consider people can keep a game alive after the Dev intends to do so. This requires communicating with Developers/Publishers to simply make plans for EOL/business closures, to see if they're willing to adopt their own internal rules for EOL/upcoming business closures by releasing DRM status, dedicated apps, sdk/tools etc.

You start with those that made the game, then go to law, Valve is generally only willing to make recommendations not so much mandated rules.

[Brian9824]

Originally posted by Brandon:

If you notice, this was never a steam must do this message, but rather a proposal of some idea's that perhaps might one day go somewhere.

Then should delete it and post it to steam discussion forum as you put it in a forum for ideas for STEAM to implement, and as pointed out steam cannot implement what you suggest as they have no control over how developers make their games or licensing laws.

[Tito Shivan]

I propose not to ask ChatGPT to do your homework.

[Mad Scientist]

Originally posted by Tito Shivan:

I propose not to ask ChatGPT to do your homework.

The funny thing is initially I put it into an ai detector and a majority of it was flagged as ai generated.

Originally posted by Brian9824:

Originally posted by Brandon:

If you notice, this was never a steam must do this message, but rather a proposal of some idea's that perhaps might one day go somewhere.

Then should delete it and post it to steam discussion forum as you put it in a forum for ideas for STEAM to implement, and as pointed out steam cannot implement what you suggest as they have no control over how developers make their games or licensing laws.

First step is always the Developers.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by Mad Scientist:

First step is always the Developers.

"But if steam forced the developers to..."

If Steam enforced policies pissing off the largest part of developers they'd all flee from it. And there won't be shortages of places willing to welcome all the refugees with open arms.

[BJWyler]

Originally posted by Tito Shivan:

I propose not to ask ChatGPT to do your homework.

This first and foremost.

Secondly within that word salad, anything you want changed in terms of game ownership and licensing is going to have to be done via your lawmakers. The software industry is not going to change 60 years of licensing precedent out of the kindness of their hearts, and thinking that posting some AI word salad on a random game store platform is anywhere close to being the place where that change is going to get started is the equivalent to relieving oneself into the wind.

[Brandon]

as I said at the very beginning, I do not deny that I used ai to help me get my thoughts together. I've never been good at writing. But no I didn't use the ai to do my homework as you say. I have a coordination problem that makes getting things done difficult. I use dictation to get around much of it but then I usually end up with a garbled mess to read. So I had chat gpt clean it up and make it more readable and organized. So please disregard my use of ai to make the document more readable, if I posted the original everyone would have a lot of trouble keeping up with my train of thought lol. I admit my shortcomings and don't deny help where it's needed. But to anyone who would use ai just out of laziness I'd agree with you, it's a tool to help and shouldn't replace hard work.

And I put it here in suggestions for steam because perhaps valve might be willing to try negotiating with publishers to accomplish some of this. Or offer incentives to those who do. The idea here was to see if it would be possible to spark something useful, not force a change. The proposal above is just one possible solution and I won't even pretend to claim that it's the best one. I hope some good will one day come of it, perhaps someone will have better idea on implementing some solutions that are more gamer friendly. But for now, I'll settle for just putting my own thoughts out for valve to review, and consider in hopes it'll lead to something better one day. I'm not the annoying person that goes around making demands then throws a fit when others don't agree lol. Everyone has their own beliefs and opinions, and this was just me sharing a few of mine. I don't expect anyone to agree or follow them, but I do hope that they will lead to improvements for everyone eventually, even if my idea's aren't used perhaps they'll spark a good idea in someone else. That's the point behind open discussions.

[Brandon]

and on a side note, I just put my own message into the ai detector and much of my own writing was detected as ai too which I find funny as hell. the 86% estimate is a bit wrong, but I won't lie about it, about 65% is probably ai where it's fixed my own messed up statements to make them more intelligible. edit... a couple of the ai's rewritten sections show up as human written as well when they weren't. so it's giving me credit for one or two of the ai's lines as well. how generous of it

[Crazy Tiger]

Originally posted by Brandon:

And I put it here in suggestions for steam because perhaps valve might be willing to try negotiating with publishers to accomplish some of this. Or offer incentives to those who do.

Why would Valve do that? Because you think it's "the good thing" to do?

[Start_Running]

M'dude.
Firstly. Did it not occur to you that the reasone it's "License-to-Play" iis because thats what the owner of the game WANT to sell?. I mean the dev/pubs can sell their game outright, they can license it for play, they can license it for distribution by region. Basically they have control. As they should. You can't force someone to sell something they don't want to sell. Just like you can't force people to buy something they don't want to buy.

There's no need for Valve/Steam to set a standard.. There already is a well established best practice. The seller decides what they want to sell. Now if you as the buyerdon't want to pay for something that is strictly a license-play, then you are free to 'not buy and do without.. That's your choice.

Your proposal fopr DRM likewise shows that you haven't put much thought into things. Neither did the AI that you used to write this apparently since I can't imagine writing this much on something that you haven't thought about.


DRM by it's nature has to be restrictive. because as it has been shown time and time again. ANY leeway you give users they will use to rob you blind.. And if you trust people to not steal when you can't see them.. you my friend have never run a retail store.


Simply put. A lock is supposed to be restrictive.

As for the anti-cheat. Well that's an evolving game. Anti_Cheat is safe. The CLoudstrike iincident isn't so much a mark against kernel based anticheat. And again. It should say enough that anti-cheat needs to be as low as the kernel level to be effective. The cheaters have no problem or compunction against putting their cheats at that level after all.

As for data transparency. Read the EULAs and ToS. It's already quite clearly stated there.

[pizDuke]

I fully support OP's cause and personally would love to see all of this implemented, especially the game ownership. Realistically though it won't happen unless valve is forced to do that by law. Unfortunately large companies understand only the language of power so all you can do for now is use other stores which are closer to your ideals (guess which one) or research how to buy steam keys if steam service dissatisfies you, so they'd receive no money from your purchases.
The anti-cheat part is interesting though, sometimes it have to be invasive to be effective. Personally I'd say the user should be able to select the level of access the anti-cheat should have - there would be different servers which require different levels of protection. That way, you'd be able to select a non-invasive anti-cheat mode to join non-invasive servers and only play with players of the same anti-cheat level and risk getting cheaters, or play with stricter anti-cheat and play with players of the same protection level with lower risk but more invasive anti-cheat.

[Start_Running]

Originally posted by pizDuke:

I fully support OP's cause and personally would love to see all of this implemented, especially the game ownership. Realistically though it won't happen unless valve is forced to do that by law.

Trust me. You don'tb want it to happen since it would change a fundamental tenent of trade.
You can't force someone to sell that which they do not want to.
If that changes then you'll be stunned at how quickly that comes back to bite you next time you try to sell something...