Always been a question I've pondered.

I've often seen comments by EA devs, or higher ranking officials (Producers etc) saying how they're illegal and action will be taken.

Shard emulators have been around almost as long as UO, so that's 10 years
So why, after 10 years, hasn't a single free shard been shut down, or any of the emulators, been shut down also?

Any theories?

Too tight fisted to take legal action

i have always wondered about that also.

The off-chance that someone will try them out 'cause they're free, and might possibly pay to play later if they like it??? Kinda like... free advertisement?

I don't know, other than them being too lazy, I see no reason for them to not do something about them.

cost vs. reward! My way of thinking is they can take legal action and get them shut down but how many players will start paying to play after that? my guess is very few. Most free shards imo again, are run by people with relatively not much money so the monetary gain is nill. All this legal action considering the number of free sites out there would be very costly. Also I tend to agree with Dip, many UO vets play freeshards for whatever reason, low money, liked it how it used to be, whatever...and there is always the possibility it will whet the appetite to come back to EA

There is no legal standing. People can play Internet attorney all they want but if there was even a glimmer of a chance that it were possible the EA legal team would have tried. Newer MMOs have probably built in the proper legal protections but such things were never a consideration when UO was created.

Plus there is the whole aspect that killing a free shard does not mean those players will suddenly convert to EA customers. Either they move to another shard or stop playing all together.

No legal standing?? Internet or not, isn't it copy-write infringement? (or something like that?)

Yes, it is copy right infringement

Is OpenOffice infringing on Microsoft Office? They both do the exact same things. Why doesn't Microsoft sue? Because they both implement the same idea in different ways. Shard emulation is no different. I know it is not that simple but it is a rough idea. The UO client is only protected by intellectual property laws and a EULA. EA has not defended their UO property so they have probably lost the right and EULA contracts have never had a true test in the court system.

OpenOfice and Microsoft Office may look like the same thing, but I guarantee that the code is not verbatium. There is more to a book than just it's cover.

Well, if the free-shards are using the UO name, wouldn't that hold water? If ANYTHING in the free-shard has the same names (towns, characters (not player characters), storylines. etc.) or their likeness used, couldn't that be used too?

I know it never would be used, I'm just saying.

I think they haven't shut them down because they would not make any money on it. If they go after someone they could get the shard shut down but would they be able to sue for any money? If I had a free server (which I don't) they couldn't get any money from me because I don't have any.

They probably don't think they are losing money either. If the free shards were gone, would the players all go to EA shards? They must think not.

It just wouldn't be cost effective.