Originally Posted by Black Magix
1) Good luck getting Blizzard into a court of law. It'll cost you much more in legal fees and litigation than a 60 dollar game.
2) You're discussing a 3rd party private server which doesn't come into effect in the two party contract you made with blizzard. You agreed to a eula which is a 2 way street between you and blizzard. End of discussion. A 3rd party server falls outside of the bounds of the eula and thus Blizzard's eula doesn't have jurisdiction (BIG IMPORTANT PART HERE) as far as you and Blizzard are concerned.
Blizzard will actively pursue third party servers but in no way are they preventing you from accessing them by modifying you're own game files. They are not threatening punishment for accessing those servers either. Blizzard's actions or inactions to third party servers are between blizzard and them and not you.
1) Exactly why a lot of the digital world nonsense skates by. People who have the funds to engage Blizzard in a legal battle have better things to do with their time and money than argue over video game rights. If the average person tried, Blizzard would slap them around with so much costly litigation that they'd go bankrupt just by trying.
2) You are right there in the sense that it's outside of the EULA, however when a 3rd party server is not allowed, it makes the contract one sided.
Step 1, present ToS/EULA that say you are "renting" the game.
Step 1a, say that you are given access to private servers in exchange for the account
Step 2 prevent 3rd party/unauthorized servers, which in turn takes a otherwise reasonable and double-sided step 1a and makes it one sided due to the multiplayer only content.
By removing the option for alternate servers you could argue that the EULA/ToS is invalid/not enforceable. But that loops back into 1). It's a steel trap meant to shut down the average person who could never, ever take this to court.
There's an argument to be made regarding this and a precedent that could be set. Good luck getting to that stage though.