The UK’s co-operative economy and its video game sector have something in common – both punch well above their weight, despite being overlooked time and time again in favour of more traditional business models and entertainment media.

Unfortunately this week the difference between them came into sharp relief, as the perennial question of ownership – which the co-operative movement puts first and foremost – became the flashpoint of a new, unwelcome era in video games.

Sony has announced they will be ending disc production for new PlayStation titles from 2028, moving instead to digital-only access of new titles. The highly anticipated release of GTA VI represented an opportunity to make the pivot and the electronics firm has taken it, hiding behind defences of “natural direction” which is anything but.

Physical media functions as personal property. It can be held, lent, resold, regardless of any third party or seller decisions beyond the point of money changing hands. Replacing it with a legal relationship, licensed access, puts the thumb on the scale of the exchange, hugely favouring the ongoing terms of the video game distributors and against players, brick and mortar high street shops, and resellers.

This is not an isolated case for Sony. Just days ago, over 550 StudioCanal titles, purchased legitimately by users of Sony’s PlayStation Network, became unavailable, with no refund offered, because an inter-firm license between Sony and StudioCanal expired. This cannot happen with physical media, but with digital media the consumer never benefits from ownership, and is exposed to the pitfalls of private, inter-firm negotiation conducted entirely without their input.

In America and Europe the issue of ownership and consumer rights are gaining real, undeniable traction. The Stop Killing Games petition in the European Union has amassed over 1.3 million signatures, against “purchase” agreements that can be revoked. A new law passed in California last year which demands storefronts cannot use the term “sell” without properly disclosing the ownership consequences of the purchase, aiding transparency and consumer power.

We have been here before. Consumer power is in our movement’s DNA – the Rochdale Pioneers founded the first co-operatives precisely because private traders were exploiting their market power, leaving customers with little to no power or governance over the terms they depended on. In defiant response, unadulterated goods, honest weights, and fair pricing became the foundation of our now international movement.

That movement built an institution that gave consumers more than just the power of their wallet, but a real claim via ownership on the firms that they depended on for the essentials. In a modern economy of plenty, ownership remains a question of governance before a question of law – when firms are acting contrary to the demands of the public they serve, by introducing unfavourable ownership relations to digital content, gamers should have the ability through a different structure of control to demonstrate the real natural direction of ownership.

Ownership and consumer rights are the bedrock of the co-operative movement, which our Party is so proud to represent. It is about time that the same pioneering approach took hold in the digital economy for good.