Sony told a federal judge that no reasonable consumer believes they own the digital games they pay for on the PlayStation Store, according to an August 21 court filing reviewed by Game File.
The filing is Sony’s first substantive response to a proposed class action filed in June in the Northern District of California by four California PlayStation customers. The plaintiffs say the store’s “Buy Now” and “Confirm Purchase” buttons imply ownership, even though the transaction provides only a revocable license.
Case centers on California’s digital goods disclosure rule
The first count in the suit is brought under Section 17500.6, which was added to California’s false advertising law by AB 2426 and took effect in January 2025. The law bars sellers from using terms such as “buy” or “purchase,” or any wording a reasonable person would read as granting unrestricted ownership, unless the checkout page includes a clear and conspicuous plain-language statement that the digital good is being licensed.
Sony says its checkout process already does that. The company pointed to fine print in the cart linking users to the PlayStation Terms of Service and the Software Product License Agreement. In Sony’s filing, the terms of service state in the eighth of 18 sections that customers “do not own the product,” while the license agreement says the software is “licensed to you, not sold” several hundred words into the document.
Sony argues ownership is not a reasonable expectation
The filing goes beyond the checkout language and argues that buyers could not plausibly expect ownership in the first place. Sony cited two purchases of the same game: Jason Mendoza bought Resident Evil Requiem on February 14, and Edward Heycock bought the same title for $69.99 on February 25.
In a passage quoted by Game File, Sony’s lawyers argued that if Mendoza had owned the game, Heycock could not also have bought it. On that basis, Sony said it is “not plausible to allege that reasonable consumers believed they were obtaining ‘ownership’” of a digital game.
Sony’s primary request is to compel private arbitration
According to Game File, Sony’s main request is procedural. The company wants the judge to send the dispute to private arbitration, arguing that PlayStation’s terms require users to resolve claims that way. The ownership arguments would come into play only if the judge declines to do so.
Arbitration would remove the risk of a jury verdict. PlayStation’s terms of service also include an express class action waiver, requiring claims to be brought on an individual basis.
Physical discs phaseout and stablecoin plan were also noted
On July 1, Sony said it will stop producing physical discs for new PlayStation games starting in January 2028, leaving the PlayStation Store and digital retailers as the only route for new releases.
The report also noted that Sony Group is reportedly planning a dollar-denominated stablecoin for purchases across its digital ecosystem.
Judge has not ruled yet
The judge has not yet ruled on Sony’s request for arbitration.