Games

If people are paying for it, there should at least be a significant communicated EOL plan. It's also highly arguable that at 'least' executables should be released for self-hosting. I haven't even seen the video or campaign, it's just common sense. I am a software engineer that gets paid to maintain this kind of stuff, and I'd be PISSED if a big chunk of my body of work became useless for any other reason than the task it solved became superfluous.

With video games, very little of the end-user experience is superfluous ever (I mean, plenty of dud unoriginal games, but...), so the whole industry deserves some preservation laws. At least don't punish people for doing for free what the companies refuse to do...

It's the "complaining when they end" thing that I'm interested in, for sure. Especially if a government listens, which he's aiming to make happen here.

If by "still paying" you mean trying to change something about the industry using closure of a decade old game then sure, you could say that.

If you don't care about this campaign, he still does videos about older titles - they release every 2-3 months, with the latest one being this video about "State of Mind".

What does corporate cock taste like? I've always wondered why so many people jump to defend anti-consumer practices.