Quote from Sironin
I know nothing about the blizzard modding scene, nor do I care. I suspect it's based more around modifying and redistributing blizzard's code rather than creating separate content. Or maybe it's a term of use for their own API. But Minecraft has no API of their own and therefore cannot dictate terms on what people write in their programs, so I went to comparable resources, such as those involved in litigation between content creators for the game Second Life and Linden Labs where authorship is far more clearly defined.
I'm not sure why you're still trying to argue the subject if you concede that you don't know what you're talking about.
The larger copyright issue is kind of moot here, since you seem to be satisfied with the vaunted "brick wall" line of argument, but as a sidenote to anyone else paying attention, I did my own research into the Second Life litigation, and there are two key differences. The first is that it was the userbase suing the company for not protecting their digital property, not the company suing users for selling their work or users suing other users for property violations,
The second differentiating factor, which is both resultant of the first and the most important, is that Second Life was marketed in part as a real-world investment tool. You bought real estate or whatever, then when your neighborhood got gentrified (or whatever) and you could resell the real estate for a real-world profit. Therefore, Second Life's users had a direct financial investment in their digital property and the company had to follow up on the selling points it promised to potential users; the fact that it didn't allowed for the possibility of a class action lawsuit. Minecraft is the exact opposite, because you have literally signed a contract agreeing not to profit from content you create for the game. (Who wants to guess how long it will be before I have to restate this in an even simpler way for one of these self-proclaimed legal experts?)