[bf1942] Anyone have a popular non-ranked server?

Mark J. DeFilippis defilm at acm.org
Mon Aug 22 13:58:51 EDT 2005

Well, different agreements for different providers.  This sounds
discriminatory,  Cover it with a non-disclosure agreement to cover
your tracks.

I am not an attorney, but sounds to me they are setting the requirements based
on the providers abilities, not wanting to drive them out of business for one

It sounds inequitable, and as a provider, if I have to provide 64 slot servers
and a smaller provider to compete with my ranked servers only has to
provide 16, I have to make a bigger investment. That sucks, and lacks
business ethics.  Yea... that sounds just like EA!

Different for differing countries. Yea, I would suspect this practice might
be illegal in some.


At 01:05 PM 8/16/2005, you wrote:
>That is correct sir.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ScratchMonkey [mailto:ScratchMonkey at MatureAsskickers.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 12:55 PM
>To: bf1942 at icculus.org
>Subject: Re: [bf1942] Anyone have a popular non-ranked server?
>--On Tuesday, August 16, 2005 12:32 PM -0400 Shockwave
><shockwave at clan-tf20.com> wrote:
> > Unless this is some trade secret of EA's, I think it would be
> > instructional to hear more about the content of these ranked provider
> > agreements.  If you recall, I asked for details such as this just the
> > other day and this is exactly the sort of thing for which I had asked.
>Someone mentioned an NDA earlier, so maybe the agreement itself is secret.

Mark J. DeFilippis                    defilm at acm.org
                                       defilm at ieee.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://icculus.org/pipermail/bf1942/attachments/20050822/89566e44/attachment.htm>

More information about the Bf1942 mailing list