The language can be attributed to lawyers. They aren't admitting to discriminatory practice so as to avoid potential shabby lawyer suits...but by stating their intent to end the restriction in future contests and apologizing for the perception among those affected they've really done what they can within the context of responsible corporate parameters.
Any competent attorney would have insisted on this sort of draft. I'd call it a win and an example of how raising one's voice in the market place is often a worth while idea.
Any competent attorney would have insisted on this sort of draft. I'd call it a win and an example of how raising one's voice in the market place is often a worth while idea.