What Sony’s Digital Future Means for Games and Copyright

Sony’s decision to stop producing physical discs for new PlayStation games from 2028 is about much more than changing how one buys games. It signals another step in a much broader shift from owning digital content to merely accessing it—a change with important implications for copyright, consumer rights, and the future preservation of games.

For decades, buying a physical game meant owning a copy that could be kept indefinitely, lent to friends, resold, donated, or preserved long after a console generation had ended. Physical ownership also created a degree of independence from publishers and platform operators. Once a game was on your shelf, it was largely yours to enjoy.

Digital distribution changes that relationship. Although consumers still “buy” games through online storefronts, what they usually receive is a licence to access the software under terms determined by the platform. Continued access may depend on servers remaining online, digital stores continuing to operate, and licences not being withdrawn or altered. In other words, the experience is more like “long-term access”.

In their announcement, Sony argues that the move simply reflects consumer behaviour. Digital sales have grown steadily for years, downloads are more convenient, and eliminating discs reduces manufacturing and distribution costs. Yet the announcement has prompted a strong reaction from players, preservation groups, and consumer advocates who see the disappearance of physical media as removing an important safeguard for consumers.

Community Response to Sony’s Announcement

One of the most prominent voices to join the debate was Hideo Kojima (Metal Gear Solid and Death Stranding creator), who in response to Sony’s announcement, described an all-digital future as “frightening”. Whether discussing games, films or music, his comments capture a growing unease with digital ecosystems in which access can be changed—or even removed—by the platform itself.

That concern is reflected in the rapid growth of the “Don’t Kill the Disc” campaign, which has already attracted well over 225,000 signatures. The campaign argues that consumers should retain the choice to purchase physical copies and that games should remain playable and preservable even after publishers move on. At a time when digital storefronts are regularly closed and online services discontinued, these concerns are no longer hypothetical.

Despite the backlash, it seems unlikely (for the time being) that Sony will reverse course. The commercial incentives are simply too strong. A fully digital ecosystem gives platform holders greater control over pricing, distribution, and the secondary market, while reducing production costs and increasing profit margins. From a business perspective, the strategy makes sense. From a consumer perspective, however, it raises difficult questions about how much control purchasers really have over the works they have paid for.

Public Policy and Legal Actions

The concerns have not been confined to gamers or industry figures. French politician Jean-Luc Mélenchon described – in a post on X –  video games as cultural goods rather than mere commercial products.

These concerns are now moving from public criticism into legal action. In the Netherlands, consumer foundation Stichting Massaschade & Consument, supported by Milberg Amsterdam, has launched a collective claim against Sony under Dutch and EU competition law, arguing that Sony has created a closed digital marketplace in which PlayStation users can purchase downloadable games and add-ons only through the PlayStation Store. According to the claim, this has allowed Sony to charge significantly higher prices for digital games while limiting consumer choice. The lawyers behind the case argue that eliminating physical media would further entrench Sony’s control by removing competing retailers and the second-hand market altogether. In addition, this lawsuit follows similar legal actions in the United Kingdom, where courts have also taken steps to review Sony’s restrictive practices in digital game distribution.

The response from European policymakers has been more measured. EU Consumer Protection Commissioner Michael McGrath has acknowledged growing concerns over digital ownership but noted that the EU cannot simply require Sony to continue producing physical discs. Companies remain free to determine how they distribute their products, provided they comply with consumer and competition law. The more significant legal question, therefore, may not be whether Sony can abandon physical media, but whether an entirely closed digital ecosystem—where one company controls the console, the marketplace, pricing and distribution—raises competition concerns. In that sense, the debate is already shifting beyond the future of the game disc towards a broader question of digital market power, consumer choice and the role of regulation in platform-based economies.

Across Europe, regulators already have rules designed to prevent powerful companies from abusing their market position. Under Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, businesses cannot use a dominant position to restrict competition or unfairly disadvantage consumers. That is precisely the argument now being made against Sony. The question is therefore no longer simply whether Sony can abandon discs—it is whether a company should be able to control the console, the marketplace, pricing and distribution all at once. Does a digital-only future remain competitive?

These developments also coincide with broader debates surrounding digital ownership. Consumer movements such as Stop Killing Games have attracted widespread attention across Europe, advocating for legal protections that ensure purchased games remain playable even after publishers discontinue support. After having received the signature threshold to submit the initiative to the European Commission, the Commission replied that at this stage it cannot propose a legal obligation to keep video games playable after they stop being provided commercially, however, existing EU consumer law already provides for important safeguards for consumers.

This is where copyright enters the conversation. Copyright law has traditionally sought to balance the interests of creators, distributors and users. Yet as creative works become increasingly tied to licences, online authentication and platform-controlled ecosystems, contract terms and technological controls often have a greater practical impact than copyright itself. The legal right to access a game may ultimately depend less on owning a lawful copy than on complying with the conditions imposed by a digital marketplace.

Final Thoughts

Sony’s announcement is therefore about more than the end of the game disc. As digital distribution becomes the norm, the challenge for policymakers will be ensuring that copyright continues to support innovation while preserving meaningful rights for consumers in an increasingly platform-controlled marketplace.