Minecraft creator Markus 'Notch' Persson has spoken out against the Electronic Software Association for claiming that the game's private servers are "illegal."Earlier this month, the California State Senate held a hearing regarding Stop Killing Games-backed bill known as the Protect Our Games Act. The bill aims to obligate publishers to find ways to make games playable, even after ending support for them. That would mean that live-service games would need to have some kind of functionality after servers are shut down. The subject of private servers was brought up as a feasible solution and cited Minecraft as a prominent example, to which ESA’s VP of State Government Affairs, Jennifer Gibbons, countered with a head-scratching argument.Gibbons claimed that these private servers are actually "illegal", a form of "piracy", and, in the case of Minecraft, are unsanctioned by Microsoft. Gibbons went as far as comparing them to a gaming "black market." None of this is true in the case of Minecraft, as its official website gives players the tools to create their own private servers and even boasts a browser filled with custom servers. It's actively encouraged by Mojang.Notch, the creator of Minecraft, spoke out against these comments, despite no longer working on the franchise."I'm not part of either any more, but I feel like the ESA is being incredibly scummy by pulling this," he said. "I've never liked them, but even less so now. I did not wish for my work to be used against people. This is borderline evil."The ESA provided IGN with two statements on the matter yesterday, one that largely reaffirmed the comments made by Gibbons and another that softened things. Below is the updated statement, which walks back some of the definitive-ness of Gibbons' original comments."Private servers that host or distribute copyrighted game content without authorization infringe on the intellectual property (IP) rights of game publishers. While publishers may take different approaches, all publishers reserve the right to exercise their rights against IP infringement. The provision in CA AB 1921 that proposed these servers as a legitimate alternative to keep games running raises concerns about a publisher's ability to enforce their IP rights. In addition, private servers operate with no oversight from the publisher and do not uphold the same trust and safety standards. This could create an unsafe environment for players and be counter to the industry's commitment to fostering safe and fun game play for all players."Cade Onder is a freelancer for IGN's news team. He covers all things entertainment, including gaming, film, and more. You can find him on Twitter @Cade_Onder.