It seems to me that it really doesn't matter who was doing it first or whether
MA 'stole' the idea. They decided to take a business that players had been developing and experimenting with and re-invent it as a Bank.
When they realized that their licenses had not really added much of value they chose a rather dubious way to correct the problem. They contradicted the position they had adopted just a few days earlier and threatened the possible competition with a muddled statement that further clarifications just made worse. There was no change to the EULA, just a threat that adds confusion and would be hard to enforce in any fair or consistent manner.
It sets a bad precedent and does nothing for
MA's credibility or the vision of
EU as a place of opportunity for all.