ESA Labels Private Minecraft Servers “Illegal” Amid “Stop Killing Games” Debate
The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) is the main trade group representing the video game industry in the United States. While it is often viewed by players as a classic industry pressure-and-lobbying organization—especially when publishers want to influence how laws are written—it also positions itself as a body that represents the sector more broadly rather than individual companies.
In recent years, one of the groups the ESA has been working against is Stop Killing Games, a consumer-driven movement focused on passing legislation that would require publishers to provide workable ways for players to keep accessing a game after official support ends. In practice, that could include enabling or facilitating community-run options such as private servers.
Publishers, unsurprisingly, have pushed back hard against added constraints on how they can shut down live-service titles. That resistance has made Stop Killing Games a frequent target of ESA opposition efforts.
Protect Our Games is one Stop Killing Games-endorsed proposal that is currently winding its way through California’s legislative process. The bill recently faced debate in the state senate.
During those proceedings, the ESA’s vice-president for state government affairs, Jennifer Gibbons, delivered remarks that many observers found surprising. Her comments came in response to remarks by state assemblymember Chris Ward about the role of community servers.
ESA Lobbyist Claims Minecraft Community Servers Are Illegal
Ward laid out the basic argument for the bill’s intent by pointing to familiar examples. “Minecraft is currently hosted by community servers, Call of Duty has community servers, so it’s an option that’s out there, in existence today,” he said.
Gibbons then disputed that framing. “They’re illegal,” she replied, adding that these community servers are not affiliated with Microsoft. She also referenced the criticism Microsoft has received over Minecraft community servers, specifically noting that they do not use the same safety standards that Microsoft’s own Minecraft servers use.
That claim runs into an obvious counterpoint: players can find the official instructions for setting up a private Minecraft server on the game’s website, and communities have been doing it since the title launched in alpha. Private servers, in general, have not been prohibited—at least not in any way that clearly shows they take revenue away from the publisher. That matters because Minecraft is sold as a single purchase, which undercuts the idea that community-hosted access automatically harms earnings.
Ward then pressed the logic of the ESA stance: “Do you think if we had no chance of changing things, we would have lobbyists coming out against us?”
Later, state senator Caroline Menjivar asked whether private servers function like the “black market” of video games. Gibbons answered directly: “Yes. In fact, we consider it piracy.” She also added that the ESA has two lawsuits currently pending against private server operators.
In a technical policy area like video games—where lawmakers may not have day-to-day context—any contested bill can become a battleground for lobbyists trying to win influence through confusion, overstatement, or mixing separate issues together. Based on how these hearings played out, more extreme quotes should not be surprising as the process continues.
Ultimately, the senate voted the bill down: three members voted in favor, four voted against, and four chose to abstain. Still, the outcome is not the final word. A reconsideration has been granted, meaning the proposal will be brought back for another debate and vote in the near future.
After the decision, a Stop Killing Games campaign volunteer took to Reddit to react. The volunteer said the campaign intends to show up in person for the next round of the debate, and that similar legislative proposals could be introduced in state legislatures across the United States.
