I'd like to post about a portion of the EULA
"You will not represent that your site is endorsed or approved by or affiliated with EA or our licensors or that any other content on your site is endorsed or approved by or affiliated with EA or our licensors."
Couldn't TSRs latest threat be deemed a violation of this portion of the EULA since they state :
"Despite this clarification, your customer continues his defamation. In short, EA states that our business model is NOT in violation of their EULA."
This may be somantics but isn't Thomas Isaksson saying that EA or their licensors are endorsing and/or approving of TSR and other paysites?
As much as TSR likes to hint at how cozy they are with EA, they actually haven't violated that clause. If they claimed on the site they were a partner with EA or somehow officially endorsed or recognized by them, it would. They skirt the line closely on that one with their talk of "access" and "inside info" but generally fall on the side of legal. And EA is really the only who could do anything about it anyway and as we've seen they generally choose to look the other way. However, if the shit ever really hit the fan to the point where TSR's problems were causing major butthurt for EA, I would imagine EA would invoke that clause, claim that TSR is fansite and no way affilated with them.
PMBD
Author