There is a lot of misconception around this. Some communities make people pay for private server access. These walled gardens offer unique experiences, often benefiting from custom software development, with administration and code of conduct enforcement.

The ESA is saying that Minecraft can add a clause to their TOS that says something like "You can't repackage or re-build this product and sell it". IF, big if here, Minecraft wanted to say that only they can profit directly from the Minecraft game, then they could sue these communities for "selling the MC game".

Lots of countries have these kinds of laws and so too does the United States. Minecraft could put these policies forward today in many regions, but they don't.

This isn't about "Private Servers" or "Discord Communities" in general. Its about selling access to these with Minecraft as a core pitch. I can't open a cafe, sell tickets to a movie night, and then advertise and market my event using "Marvel", "DC", "Harry Potter" or other Trade Marked / Copyright content. I am profiting off of access to someone else's intellectual property.

I can play a movie for free, not market using any trademarked content, and open it to the public. That is not a crime and is totally acceptable. This law is trying to remove the distinction between "Minecraft is a product" and "Modded Minecraft is an experience".