Look, I had received a similar reminder email about account deletion over inactivity before for those accounts I don't use alot in the present time but that's for the other services I use. Even Google came up with a similar policy but that's nothing I can worry about alot since I watch videos on YouTube regularly. Within 30 days, the account will be removed for inactivity but according to the definitive clarification from Ubisoft, only inactive accounts with no game purchases will be removed in 30 days, not accounts with game purchases so that people can come back and continue from where they've left off.
People have other/important things to do and that's understandable. However, to certain people angry over this controversy, it's like Ubisoft goes out of their way to take advantage of this controversial policy to remove accounts of the affected gamers within 30 days while the affected gamers are doing whatever important thing that keeps them away from their homes for a longer period of time. It's also like Ubisoft follows on a treacherous footstep to take away those games the affected gamers bought by removing their accounts behind their backs while they're away. Some of the concerns are valid enough but some of the angry reactions had gone on a different direction.
Whether you'll choose to know/believe the definitive official information or not after the backlash, I guess it depends on whatever backlash you're offended over. I had seen some previous controversies where I chose not to know ANY piece of official information from the offenders. What could prolong the ongoing offense was an apology demand, meaning I'd be told to apologize to the offender just because I had criticized or made a rant on something that sparked the controversy. I wouldn't turn a blind eye over a time-wasting apology demand because it constituted as a backlash defense. I might be in the right to criticize such controversial stuffs in the end. Some examples included the disturbing dance movie on Netflix, Cu***s, and the licensed Miss Kobayashi game developed by Kaminari Games. So far, I didn't encounter any reply with creepy defense in mind being thrown at me because I made a rant about the latter at that time. What that meant was weirdos telling me some immature, useless or drama-stirring shit while they kept defending that disturbing crap like it's something beautiful or whatnot. You know what else was unacceptable? A misunderstanding card. There has to be a better statement than playing that stupid card and it's better be something believable.
The official clarification from Ubisoft is something people should refer to but there is one other reminder that you don't own anything when it comes to cloud gaming and NFTs. In case of NFTs, the only thing you get is the receipt and only idiots think that they own such NFT items when the receipt is actually the only thing. What about freemium mobile games? Well, unless they can be played offline, they're pretty much useless once discontinued. It's even the same for certain modern arcade games which happened to fall under Live Service category, meaning that they're updated with new content on a regular basis. Another reminder is that Microsoft came up with a controversial policy regarding used games for Xbox One but they quickly backtracked after all the backlash they faced and even then, people were smart enough to buy the Playstation 4 when it came out. It took Phil Spencer a lot of time to restore the reputation of the console.
Ubisoft had an audacity to bring up the GDPR law when people know for sure that the GDPR law is generally about protecting the users' privacy and Ubisoft could land themselves in legal trouble with the controversial policy they came up with, had it not sounded clear enough.
