All hands on deck!

The EU #KidsAct could end #StopKillingGames by collapsing the EU gaming market and making private and community servers illegal!:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQRcK9nYg9g

"The best thing you can do is spread the word...The people who write this crap do not like it when the public at large knows what they're trying to do to you" - Ross Scott

Don't just take our word for it, here's the EU Kids Act to see for yourself:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52026PC0681

Ross also has more links in the video description

Hello @StopKillingGames!
You can find some more detailed information on our dedicated websites:
The EU KIDS Act explained: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/kids-act-explained
Press release: https://commission.europa.eu/news-and-media/news/eu-kids-act-helping-children-navigate-safer-online-world-2026-09-17_en
Factsheet: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/fs_26_1891
Protect what matters: your digital life: https://commission.europa.eu/digital-life_en

@EUCommission @StopKillingGames yeah read their propaganda they already read to see the EU will kill you ... yeaaaah

Hello @StopKillingGames ,the EU KIDS Act addresses a very real problem: the safe design of online platforms and services, including online games. We know that many in the gaming industry and gamers themselves have legitimate questions about the impact this legislation will have and current uncertainty surrounding it. We would remind them that this is still only a proposal and we are here to listen ↓

@StopKillingGames We worked with a range of individuals, experts and companies in developing this proposal, including those in the gaming industry. However, we do want to reassure you that some claims floating around do not match what the proposal says. It is about protecting kids while being workable for small studios.

@StopKillingGames Regarding your concern about private servers, the Act bans nothing outright. A private or community server as such is not subject to the regulation as this would be considered a hosting service and not one covered by Art. 2. The focus is on obligations for the provider of the online game being hosted on these servers, but there are no obligations for a person only providing the underlying infrastructure to host a game.

@EUCommission @StopKillingGames In my opinion age verification, at least the current state of this technology, is not suited for solving these problems. We need to solve the problem of private, secure and decentralized age verification first, before attempting to use a severly flawed technology to try and fix another problem. Although there probably is some open source project out there already that does exactly this.

@EUCommission @StopKillingGames a private or community server provides the same game, and this proposal makes it illegal

@EUCommission Some games (Minecraft) provide server-side binaries.
Do i have to use and pay for access to the age verification infrastructure?
Even if you say no, the studios would not differentiate between us and them, and would probably cease distribution of server binaries altogether, which is exactly against what @StopKillingGames is fighting for.
Also, any reliable age verification process would be a huge data breach risk, and they WILL happen. Gvmnt papers last a long time after all...

@EUCommission @StopKillingGames

3(g)(iii) DSA: a ‘hosting’ service, consisting of the storage of information provided by, and at the request of, a recipient of the service;

This clearly just refers to hardware providers. The community server host (recipient of the hosting service AND online game provider) does much more than that: they are providing software, moderation, etc. Servers don't just store information; they are authoritative. They calculate, process and distribute game state.

@EUCommission @StopKillingGames Funny how you're already planning to force age verification into games when age verification as a concept has no solid legal footing yet. The DSA doesn't mandate it. It just says big platforms must manage risks to minors. The Commission has leaned on a few specific services, sure, but nowhere does the law actually establish age verification as a requirement. And now the Kids Act wants to hardcode it everywhere?

The Commission's own age verification app only launched in 2026 and platforms aren't even required to use it. So you'd be mandating a tool that hasn't even been adopted by the market, and reportedly has a silent fallback that undermines the entire "privacy preserving" sales pitch. Calling it that doesn't make it true.

The real problem here is process. You're pushing a surveillance-ready infrastructure through the back door of a child safety bill, before the underlying mechanism is legally settled, before its privacy guarantees are proven, and while public opposition is loud and clear. That's not protection, that's a fait accompli.

And spare us the "it's only for the children" line. We've heard it every single time a government wants a new tracking capability. I'm an adult. I don't want your verification app near my games, and I'm far from alone. If the EU wants to claim it listens to citizens, maybe start by not railroading an unfinished, legally dubious tracking mechanism into every corner of digital life.

@EUCommission Claiming private game servers are “hosting services” conflates hardware with software operators, misinterpreting 3(g)(iii) DSA.
A VPS provides hardware storage. A game server is an active process running in volatile memory (RAM) storing nothing. Players send raw inputs to an authoritative engine that evaluates, overrides, and generates game state. This is processing, not storing user data.
Hardware host and server admin are vehicle and driver. Admin controls state, rules, and chat.

@EUCommission
We asked developers on the costs of implementing this, and the estimate came to 266k-444k Euros for the first year in order to be fully compliant:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZvVsGT3QGiKf1bolhCP2FP1Ud447o_qGCdgfNTEtIA/edit?tab=t.0

This would cripple small devs.

You claim to have worked with a panel of experts, but gamers, devs, and Video Games Europe caution against sweeping age assurance measures: https://www.videogameseurope.eu/news/video-games-europe-statement-on-the-eu-kids-act-announcement/

Not to mention @mpiinf with their feedback that this proposal is "unworkable and dangerous": https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/19418-Child-online-safety-keeping-digital-spaces-accountable-and-trustworthy-EU-Kids-Act-/F33577113_en