Originally Posted by
Saintheart
I am a lawyer, but IP and serious contract law is not my specialty. Not providing legal advice here, and if you did use legal advice from a forum post you're in deeper trouble than I thought.
That clause - plus outright 'deactivation' of 1.0a - means it's still a hard no from me. It is still an attempt primarily to eliminate competition from other, less-known, and in some cases better products, an anticompetitive wolf disguised as a sheep wringing its hands (hooves) about social media criticism.
If WOTC decides they don't like your product issued under the OGL 1.2, they can kill it under this clause. No recourse, no definitions of terms, no fair or equal footing to contest it. WOTC defines what the words mean, just like Humpty Dumpty with Alice. "BuT yoU CaN ALWays TAke It TO CouRT!" Sure. Where WOTC has already primarily written the rules of that combat to favour them by the wording of the licence. And you have to not only get around their definition of the terms, but the clause in the contract that says you can't sue them to contest it. Yeah. Sure. Atticus Finch lives.
It's now a decision for D&D players and weak DMs whether they can accept a monopolistic approach to the market disguised as a concern about moral panics. Simple as that.
Re: Official OGL Discussion Thread
)
