I want to state that I did not intend this to be a lawyer question. My understanding was that they seem settled on that the only interpretations of not authorized involve not being able to invoke section 9 at all. Hence my point is more that someone not legally schooled like them might see this, and hence "by mistake" start building a business on 1.0a to oneD&D conversion for instance. However maybe it might still be an interesting legal question here: Would wizards then somehow could be considered at fault in misleading this person, and hence being an accomplice in the potential copyright infringement?