PlayStation can delete all your digital games after 3 years of inactivity (EU)

Sony policy and account/data handling

• Some users report Sony making it very hard to delete accounts, yet being willing to delete games after inactivity, leading to a “worst of both worlds” feeling: lose purchases but keep data.
• Several see the 3‑year inactivity clause as a “cover your ass” option to clean up accounts later, not something clearly enforced today.
• Concern is raised about Sony’s history of security breaches and the desire to have accounts (and data) actually removed.

GDPR and legal interpretation

• One view: GDPR article 5(1)(e) (“no longer than necessary”) and data minimization require deleting inactive accounts after a set period, so Sony’s policy is compliant and even necessary.
• Counter‑view: ownership and account recovery are legitimate purposes; GDPR does not force deletion in this scenario. “No longer than necessary” is contextual, and licenses themselves aren’t necessarily personal data.
• Further debate over article 17 (erasure rights) and 5(1)(c) (data minimization): some argue companies must prune inactive accounts; others argue big firms use GDPR as a pretext (similar to cookie banners) to justify self‑serving choices.

Digital ownership and revocation across platforms

• Multiple examples show digital purchases are fragile: Sony’s potential deletions, Microsoft/EA delisting older FIFA titles, Forza licensing expirations, Mojang/Microsoft Minecraft account migrations that locked out some original buyers, Microsoft’s ebook store shutdown.
• Some argue that if access can be revoked or redownloads blocked, it was never “owned,” only licensed, and laws should force retention/transfer of purchased digital goods.
• Xbox gets praise for long‑term backwards compatibility and making old purchases playable on new hardware, though Microsoft is also criticized for account and content losses.

Consumer behavior and corporate incentives

• A long list of past corporate misbehaviors (DRM, rootkits, printer DRM, subscription lock‑ins, privacy scandals) is cited to argue that consumers briefly complain then continue to buy, giving companies no reason to change.
• Others push back, noting that change does happen (e.g., IE’s fall, alternatives to dominant vendors) but it’s slow and uneven.
• Some advocate “voting with your wallet” and avoiding brands with bad histories; others are pessimistic about the impact.

Alternative platforms: PC, Steam, and retro

• Some see Steam/PC as comparatively user‑friendly, though there’s concern about future “enshittification” and Valve’s middleman role.
• There’s enthusiasm for retro hardware (N64, Jaguar, Game Boy, NES) and physical media as a way to escape digital lock‑in and ensure games remain playable.

Economic and operational considerations

• A tangent discusses how ongoing access to digital purchases represents a kind of liability/deferred obligation.
• One side argues the marginal cost of preserving “owns/doesn’t own” flags is tiny; another notes maintenance, security, and platform evolution do create non‑trivial long‑term costs.