This was unofficial but from a Mojang-er commentary about a week before the official statement re: servers.
So, if it's on the radar enough that they think it's making the game and the company look bad, they must have had to clean up a few messes. Then, the whole possible tax evasion angle. Also bad PR, even though it's not Mojang committing the deed.
What's reasonable about being able to charge everyone to play but not being able to give people perks for donating?
There's nothing requiring a server to charge everyone or not run at all; you're speculating again on what will happen.
It only says that _if_ they're gonna charge for simple access, they have to charge everyone, and charge the same value for everyone. No "let Steve in for free because I've known him since preschool, and charge Jimmy 5 bucks because he's kinda cool, but charge Dave 20 because his sister wouldn't go out with me."
No paywalling of game aspects, or tiering of players. No "5 bucks if you want TNT and/or lava." No "10 bucks if you want to get to the Nether." No "20 bucks if you want to use our cool mod stuff." Regardless of whether there's a charge at the door or not, once a player is in, they get access to everything the server is running.
Donations have to be exactly that, straight up money in the tip jar. Acknowledging the donation with thanks is allowed (I daresay encouraged!), but that's it. If you want to give them something, then....
Cosmetic only perks can be sold, which give people a way to wear their support of the server as a badge.
And finally there's adverts and sponsors. I think this one is a little sketchy, as I'm not fond of letting adverts into my brain, at all, ever. Some people don't mind them.
Plenty of ways for a server to generate revenue, and it's not limited to one of them!
I doubt that any significant number of people are getting rich by operating a Minecraft server, even the predatory P2W folks. Turning an official profit is much different than turning a new-solid-gold-ferrari-every-month profit. There are too many options for other places to play for anyone to put up with that.
Actually, they can't see, or rather will have difficulty seeing, who "nudges their servers within the boundaries, and who doesn't". Did you miss the entire penultimate paragraph? Since there are so many servers, and literally any schmoe can make one, it's gonna be hard to track down rulebreakers.
You greatly underestimate the power of technology, and where the limits lay. Every client calls home for updates and the news ticker on startup. It's very possible that additional information goes back to Mojang. That could also be happening with the servers. All that aside, it would take exactly one call to Google to get a list of (damn near) All The Servers. Joe Schmoe's ad-hoc server isn't even part of the equation, because in order to transgress on the money rules, you need payment vectors, and you need to be findable so people can get on the server and pay; that's a trail to follow. Any server that is hidden well enough to not show up on the big Google list is hidden well enough to not have a bunch of kids stumbling upon it...
Which is the crux of this whole thing, really.
Just like the IAP problems Apple has had to deal with, parents are quite willing to handwave-accept requests from the digital babysitter.... until it starts costing them serious money. Then the parents get angry, like any good consumer. "I've been unjustly parted from my money!" They target the easiest place to vent their rage: Mojang. "It's their game, surely they are involved somehow!" No, really, Mojang isn't.... server hosting is more complicated than that. But a lot of those angry parents think that a computer is a magic box, too.
Frankly, that Mojang is being this chill about the whole thing is probably a miracle. Any other company would've already set rabid lawyers loose to sow terror and nuke servers. Maybe it's that clean Swedish air?
It's funny, because almost everything you say here fits perfectly into my argument.
No, really, it doesn't. Your argument seems to hinge around being angry that anyone could possibly turn a profit, and accounts for only one possible outcome: that these new rules Will Make Everything Be Paid Access, And Ruin Everything Forever. Have you got anything more than that, something that doesn't rhyme with "the sky is falling"?
Servers don't have to jack up their rates to keep an even keel... they just have to provide enough value that people actually _want_ to support the server. The relationship between server and player doesn't have to be adversarial.
Seriously, it's a video game. Don't like it? Don't play on a server that looks like it is operating in that way. Can't find a free server? (yeah, right) Run your own. Still angry? Find a different game to play. Plenty of alternate choices to be made... and plenty of alternates that are
*gasp* 100% free! (that's unpossible!)
-----
You severely underestimate the power investment goes into making a decision for a purchase, not to mention the fact that it's entirely unlikely that there will be such a large amount of pay-to-play servers.
Emotional investment and loss aversion do factor in, but I think most of the problem to date has been the IAP angle. As I said above, the Un-Parents(tm) will absently agree to damn near anything to keep the digital babysitter functioning... until it hits them hard in the wallet.