How long until things like "online passes", DLC and virtual items in F2P games are ruled to be equivalent to software licenses, and thus are forced to be resellable by gamers?

All of those things can be used as ways to avoid giving customers their lawful rights, and I wouldn't be surprised if some publishers try all sorts of cute tricks to evade the law.

Maybe publishers should consider that all their attempts at evading this generate friction with their customers which is not a positive thing. To put it bluntly, people sometimes have this "annoying" habit of gradually realizing who's screwing them...

Because there is no way it can be done in a feasible and convenient manner. It means one of the following things:
1. That courts have endorsed charging money to pirate out digital copies of a game.
2. That all digital games will now have DRM. Goodbye independent development studios like Mojang unless they want to sell out completely to a larger corporation; who might reject them for any reason, leaving the small company no options for distribution in Europe. This goes for foreign developers and distributers as well.
3. Some physical device will be required for authentication; defeating the purpose of digital distribution.

Why would all digital games need DRM because of this?

Do you see gog.com stopping to sell DRM-free games?

Good answers, I agree.

This is terrible news... A used digital license is as good as new and this will only result in the prices of new games to skyrocket. Companies are going to make money somehow, and if they are going to end up selling less copies, they have to drive the price up to readjust to match supply and demand. This will inevitably destroy smaller companies.

No. If they survived with higher costs and higher piracy rates when they sold only or almost exclusively on physical support, they won't be damaged by this. Anyhow, as transferring the rights of a DRM protected digital license will require the publisher's active support, the EU could protect their interests too establishing a fair fee for doing it. These two measures put together could even finally give to the publishers what up until now was taken by GameStop on second-hand physical copies market.
Finally, historically a market with truely more freedom favours outsiders more than market leaders.

You're commenting on point number 2 which I already addressed in point number 1:
People will be able to legally sell copies of their game while retaining access to the original. There would be no way to enforce the sale of multiple digital copies of the same game.

Essentially, the only other option would be point number 3, physical authentication, which would defeat the purpose of digital downloading.

Read my post immediately before the post of yours I'm answering: digital download publishers could keep the DRM and manage the transfer of the license, possibly for a reasonable fee. This way they could cash on digital used licenses what currently GameStop cash in their place on physical copies.

It would actually be very easy for small developers to comply with the ruling.  All they would need to do is to have no DRM.  Then someone that buys it could easily sell their copy to someone else.  Even a key would be fine as long as it is not single or limited use.

I think this wont end well for PC gaming.