That's the whole point. If you give people a clear, definitive explanation of what is allowed, smart, bad people will immediately set about exploiting the **** out of the loopholes.

CCP is using deliberately open-ended language in the same way that in many countries, criminal laws do. They want there to a grey area SO that they can approach each case on its own merits and dont have their hands tied when they have to deal with a clearly abusive case which is "technically" on the legitimate side of a clear dividing line.

Its a good policy and one I wholeheartedly agree with as a lawyer.

Incorrect. While a EULA might not be legally enforceable as a contract, that doesn't prevent CCP from refusing access to its services to whoever it likes for whatever reason it likes. At best consumer protection law might get you a refund of unused, pre-purchased subscription time (doesnt apply if you use ISK bought plexs), which will be vastly less than any legal fees incurred, so good luck with that.

Its going to stop legitimate players taking comfort from EULA wording to justify using a cheat. This eliminates much of the market for such cheats, which in turn discourages their development.

Then its probably fine. Its for each individual player to use their brain when deciding whether to use a tool whether it could constitute a cheat, unfair advantage, exploit or other circumvention of intended game mechanics.