Sony Contends Digital Game Purchases Grant Licenses, Not Ownership
Sony has informed a federal judge that consumers do not reasonably believe they own the digital games they purchase through the PlayStation Store, according to a filing reviewed by Game File on August 21.
This submission marks the company’s initial substantive response to a proposed class-action lawsuit filed in June in the Northern District of California by four PlayStation customers. The plaintiffs allege that the store’s “Buy Now” and “Confirm Purchase” buttons create a false impression of ownership, when in reality, the transaction grants only a revocable license.
The lawsuit’s primary claim is brought under Section 17500.6 of California’s false advertising law, which was enacted by AB 2426 and took effect in January 2025. This statute prohibits sellers from using terms like “buy,” “purchase,” or any other language that a reasonable person would interpret as conferring unrestricted ownership, unless the checkout process includes a clear and conspicuous statement, in plain language, that the purchase of a digital good constitutes a license.
Sony asserts that its checkout process already fulfills this requirement. Fine print within the shopping cart directs users to the PlayStation Terms of Service and the Software Product License Agreement. The terms of service, in the eighth of 18 sections, explicitly state that customers “do not own the product.” Similarly, the license agreement clarifies that the software is “licensed to you, not sold,” a detail presented several hundred words into the document.
The filing further argues that the concept of ownership is not something a buyer could plausibly expect in this context. Sony’s legal team pointed to the example of Jason Mendoza purchasing “Resident Evil Requiem” on February 14 and Edward Heycock buying the same game for $69.99 on February 25. The lawyers contended that if Mendoza had truly owned the game, Heycock would not have been able to purchase it, rendering it “not plausible to allege that reasonable consumers believed they were obtaining ‘ownership’” of a digital game.
Sony’s principal request, as reported by Game File, is for the judge to compel the dispute into private arbitration, citing that PlayStation’s terms of service commit users to settle claims through this method. The arguments regarding ownership would only apply if the judge denies this arbitration request.
Arbitration serves to eliminate the risk of a jury verdict, and PlayStation’s terms of service include an express class-action waiver that mandates claims be brought individually.
Sony announced on July 1 that it will cease production of physical discs for new PlayStation games starting in January 2028, leaving the PlayStation Store and digital retailers as the sole avenues for new releases. Sony Group is reportedly also planning a dollar-denominated stablecoin for transactions across its digital ecosystem.
The judge has not yet issued a ruling on the arbitration request.
