Quote:
Originally Posted by demoniac
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. |
Repeated and reposted for clarity and comprehension. THIS is the core of the problem, particularly (but by no means exclusively) the bold part.
Thx for summing it up so succinctly Demoniac.