California Assembly Bill 1921

Extracted Attributes

• 2026 Bill Title

  Protect Our Games Act

• 2016 Bill Subject

  Institutionalization of unlimited ballot harvesting

• 2024 Bill Sponsor

  Diane Papan

• 2026 Bill Sponsor

  Christopher M. Ward

• 2026 Assembly Vote

  43-16 in favor

Timeline

• Assembly Member Diane Papan introduces the 2024 version of AB 1921 regarding linear generators using renewable fuels. (Source: Web Search Results)

  2024-01-25

• The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy holds a hearing on the 2024 version of AB 1921. (Source: Web Search Results)

  2024-04-03

• Assembly Member Christopher M. Ward introduces AB 1921 (Protect Our Games Act) to the California State Assembly. (Source: Web Search Results)

  2026-02-12

• The California State Assembly passes the 2026 version of AB 1921 (Protect Our Games Act) with a 43-16 vote. (Source: Web Search Results)

  2026-05-27

• The 2026 version of AB 1921 is read for the first time in the California State Senate. (Source: Web Search Results)

  2026-05-28

2025 California Proposition 50

California Proposition 50, officially known as the Election Rigging Response Act, is an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. state of California, which was passed by voters in a special election ballot on November 4, 2025. At the urging of California governor Gavin Newsom, the proposition was put on the ballot by the Democratic-controlled California State Legislature. Approved by 64.4% of voters, the proposition's purpose was to redraw the state's congressional districts, replacing the ones drawn by the bipartisan California Citizens Redistricting Commission during the earlier 2020 redistricting cycle. The new districts will be used for the 2026 United States House of Representatives elections through the 2030 elections. Following the 2030 census, congressional redistricting authority will return to the independent commission under the normal decennial process. The map defined in Proposition 50 is a Democratic gerrymander intended to offset the gerrymander by Texas Republicans, both of which are part of the broader 2025–2026 United States redistricting effort. It redraws several congressional districts to incorporate larger shares of urban and suburban Democratic voters, increasing Democratic registration advantages in competitive districts and converting several Republican-leaning seats into Democratic-leaning ones. Republicans have responded to Proposition 50 with legislation, their own propositions, and litigation. Republicans challenged the proposition in court both before the election, as well as after it was passed by the voters, but their legal efforts were exhausted when the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear the appeal.

Web Search Results

• California's AB 1921 would mean you actually own the games you buy

  Image via CA Assembly Now, there’s a proposed law in California that seeks to fight that. Christopher Ward is a member of California’s Assembly representing the 78th District (the CA Assembly is the lower house of the California legislative branch — basically the state-level version of the House of Representatives). This year, he introduced Assembly Bill 1921 Protect our Games Act. AB 1921 “requires companies selling server-connected video games to notify consumers before shutting down a game’s servers, rendering it inoperable. Upon ceasing support for a game, a company must provide (a) a means of accessing a playable version of the game or (b) a full refund to those who purchased it.” In a more detailed analysis of the bill, the purpose is described as: [...] The ESA’s released a statement about AB 1921 that reads: > Many games depend on evolving technology, licensed content, and online systems that change over time. Assembly Bill 1921 could force developers to spend limited time and resources keeping old systems running instead of creating new games, features, and technology. In the end, this policy doesn't reflect how games actually work today. This bill sets strict rules that could ultimately mean fewer new and innovative experiences for players. [...] Under this bill (which is still only proposed, not an enacted law), if a developer or publisher decides to stop supporting a game, a couple things have to happen. First, they have to give users 60 days notice that the game is going away. Then, they have to either patch the game so it remains playable (or otherwise ensure there’s an, effectively, offline mode) or offer a refund. There are reasonable exceptions (free games, subscription-based games), but the goal is to allow a user to retain some semblance of ownership even after the publisher stops supporting the game. Which matters when one statistic shows that over 90% of games become unplayable when support stops. Image via Stop Killing Games

• The California State Assembly passes AB 1921, Stop Killing Games' Protect Our Games Act | GamesIndustry.biz

  Home News # The California State Assembly passes AB 1921, Stop Killing Games' Protect Our Games Act "Big update for game preservation" Stop Killing Games Image credit: Stop Killing Games Vikki Blake avatar News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on The California State Assembly has passed Assembly Bill 1921, the Protect Our Games Act, in a landmark ruling on game preservation. Consumer movement Stop Killing Games - which aims to bring attention to the depreciation of online media after Ubisoft pulled The Crew not only from its servers but also from customers' libraries, too - called it a "big update for game preservation." [...] After the floor vote passed by 43-16, championed by San Diego Assembly Member Chris Ward, the organization said: "Th[is] bill would require video game companies to give players advance notice before shutting down server-dependent games and provide a way to keep purchased games playable afterward, such as offline access, community servers, or another workable option." Now the bill heads to the California State Senate, where it will require "public support to keep moving forward." Last year, Stop Killing Games gathered enough momentum to necessitate a response from "the voice of a responsible games ecosystem," Video Games Europe. A similar UK petition hit 10,000 signatories in February 2025, at which point the UK Government was obliged to respond. [...] The California State Assembly passes AB 1921, Stop Killing Games' Protect Our Games Act Xbox is reportedly considering closing South of Midnight studio, Compulsion Games, with Double Fine and Ninja Theory also allegedly at risk Toys for Bob says Spyro: Reignited's 11m sales proved "there's an audience that woke up to show up for that series" Blizzard sues private World of Warcraft server for "large-scale, egregious, and ongoing infringement of Blizzard's intellectual property" HR veteran Liz Prince awarded MBE for services to the games industry and diversity Xbox Game Studios boss Craig Duncan and Chief of Staff Louise O'Connor step down EA rolls out Advertising platform to let companies market "directly into gameplay" Sonic lead says AAA developers have much to learn from indie studios

• [PDF] AB 1921 - Assembly Bill Policy Committee Analysis

  in the name of the people of the State of California by the Attorney General or by any district attorney. COMMENTS: 1) Author’s statement. According to the author: AB 1921 aims to protect video game users against unexpected shutdowns of their digital games. When a game operator stops supporting a live-service game server, that game becomes inoperable for users who purchased a license with the expectation of continual access. This bill requires user notifications before the end of server support and ensures that paid users walk away with either a playable version of the game or a refund once services cease. As consumers increasingly enjoy entertainment and engage in hobbies via digital goods, furthering digital consumer protection and transparency in this space is essential. 2) Ownership [...] use of a game would be prohibited from selling that game. Subscription based services, free games, and games that involve genuine transfers of ownership are exempted. The bill is enforceable by the Attorney General or any district attorney. A previous bill in this space, AB 2426 (Irwin, 2024) prohibited a seller of a digital good from advertising or offering for sale a digital good to a purchaser with the terms “buy,” “purchase,” or any other term which a reasonable person would understand to confer an unrestricted ownership interest in the digital good, or alongside an option for a time-limited rental, unless the seller receives at the time of each transaction an affirmative acknowledgment from the purchaser, or the seller provides to the consumer before executing each transaction a [...] apply to any of the following: a. Any subscription-based service that advertises or offers for sale access to any digital game solely for the duration of the subscription. b. Any digital game that is advertised or offered to a person for no monetary consideration. AB 1921 Page 4 c. Any digital game that is advertised or offered to a person that the seller cannot revoke access to after the transaction, which includes making the digital game available at the time of purchase for permanent offline download to an external storage source to be used without a connection to the internet. 6) Provides that actions for relief under the bill can be prosecuted exclusively in a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action brought in the name of the people of the State of California by the

• [PDF] AB 1921 (Papan) - Assembly Bill Policy Committee Analysis - CA.gov

  AB 1921 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 3, 2024 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND ENERGY Cottie Petrie-Norris, Chair AB 1921 (Papan) – As Introduced January 25, 2024 SUBJECT: Energy: renewable electrical generation facilities: linear generators SUMMARY: Adds “linear generators using renewable fuels” as an eligible facility under the California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), and provides a definition of linear generator that includes designating new categories of fuel “renewable,” including hydrogen and ammonia. EXISTING LAW: 1) Defines a “ renewable electrical generation facility” as a facility that uses biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation of 30 megawatts (MW) or less, digester gas, municipal solid [...] includes a definition of “renewable fuels” as inclusive of, but not limited to, “hydrogen, ammonia, and biogas.” While specified biogas is currently an RPS-eligible fuel source, hydrogen and ammonia are not.8 Moreover, the inclusion of these fuel types is added without clarification, seemingly permitting fuels derived from fossil resources into the RPS.9,10 7 CEC, GFO-23-601, “California’s National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program Questions and Answers,” December 21, 2023. 8 With the exception of hydrogen used in fuel cells, which the CEC defined and permitted without explicit statutory inclusion. 9 Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; “Hydrogen Resources”; AB 1921 Page 4 There has been multi-year legislative efforts to include hydrogen – either a specific [...] hydrogen gas manufactured using steam reforming or any other conversion technology that produces hydrogen from a fossil fuel feedstock. Requires the CPUC, CEC and California Air Resources Board (CARB) to consider green electrolytic hydrogen an eligible form of energy storage and consider its potential uses. (Public Utilities Code §§ 400.2-400.3) FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed fiscal and will be referred to the Committee on Appropriations for its review. AB 1921 Page 2 BACKGROUND: RPS – The California RPS program began with a mandate to all retail sellers to provide 20% RPS-eligible generation by the end of 2017.1 The initial RPS statute sought to establish a market for renewables, by financially incentivizing long term contracting between electricity providers and above-market

• Bill tracking in California - AB 1921 (2025-2026 legislative session) - FastDemocracy

  Skip to content AB 1921 Close Bill Overview Companion Bills Bill Summary Tweets Similar Bills Sponsors News Votes TranscriptAI Recordings Past Meetings Actions Bill Texts Documents Sources Introduced Feb 12, 2026 Passed Assembly May 27, 2026 Passed Senate Became Law AB 1921 California Assembly Bill Did you know we offer free bill tracking in Congress and 50 states, AI tools to streamline your work, and a great mobile app? Sign up here Digital games: ordinary use. Last Action See all actions Senate • May 28, 2026: In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. Latest Bill Text See all bill texts 05/18/26 - Amended Assembly ### Summary ### Comments on AB 1921 ### Tweets ### Whip Lists Sponsors Christopher M. Ward [...] + Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P. Mar 19, 2026 | Assembly + Referred to Coms. on P. & C.P. and JUD. + From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. Read second time and amended. Feb 13, 2026 | Assembly + From printer. May be heard in committee March 15. Feb 12, 2026 | Assembly + Read first time. To print. Bill Texts AB1921HTML 02/12/26 - IntroducedPDF 03/19/26 - Amended AssemblyPDF 04/06/26 - Amended AssemblyPDF 05/18/26 - Amended AssemblyPDF Documents 04/15/26- Assembly Privacy And Consumer ProtectionPDF 04/18/26- Assembly JudiciaryPDF 05/05/26- Assembly AppropriationsPDF 05/20/26- Assembly Floor AnalysisPDF Sources × Try FastDemocracy Professional [...] Do pass as amended. YES: 11 NO: 2 OTHER: 2 YES: 11 Solache Wicks Krell Aguiar-Curry Mark González Pacheco Sharp-Collins Caloza Pellerin Fong Calderon NO: 2 Hoover Dixon NOT VOTING: 2 Ta Tangipa Sources May 28, 2026, Assembly AB 1921 Ward Assembly Third Reading YES: 43 NO: 16 OTHER: 21 YES: 43 Harabedian Lee Muratsuchi Bennett Stefani Quirk-Silva Jackson Petrie-Norris Kalra Bonta Arambula Gabriel Elhawary Wallis Wicks Alvarez Lowenthal Aguiar-Curry Mark González Boerner Fong Bauer-Kahan Rivas Schiavo Rogers Addis Schultz Haney Ortega Carrillo Alanis Ward Connolly Zbur Ransom Bryan Wilson Hart Nguyen Sharp-Collins Pellerin Garcia Gipson NO: 16