I don't know but I think it's not just about the old games that aren't produced anymore. I think it could be about protecting profit in other areas. They may want to control the Overton window so that it doesn't become thinkable that the same thing could happen to other video games or media. If a library is able to buy a video game and loan it out for free online, then that could become a problem for some models. Is it possible to loan movies and TV series online in libraries now?
If you have the resources, then a maximalist IP agenda would be the most rational, to extract as many rights as possible because it creates wider moat for attackers to cross. You keep them busy fighting things that don't matter to you, so they stay far away from your core business interests.
> is it possible to loan movies and TV series online in libraries now?
Absolutely. In fact it's unusually popular. In undergrad I remember the only people reading physics books were physics students, but it wasn't only film/media studies etc checking out DVDs. I'm just about old enough that unlimited streaming wasn't ubiquitous, so people would go to the video stations in the library and bingewatch there.
edit: despite my anecdote, this service is available online too, see for example the service, Overdrive, which is popular with municipal libraries.
> If you have the resources, then a maximalist IP agenda would be the most rational, to extract as many rights as possible because it creates wider moat for attackers to cross.
That's the answer, the IP conglomerates aren't arguing in good faith, they just want to defend their moat as much as possible and push the debate outside of rethinking media consumption in the digital age.
Those IP conglomerates have nothing to gain from any legislation change, they basically already have all the rights they could possibly have and want to keep their position. If that means throwing away some old games under the bus, they are happy with that.
