Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Enrahim2" data-source="post: 8910261" data-attributes="member: 7039850">One issue I haven't seen touched upon is the issue of contractual misrepresentation? I just stumbled upon the concept online, and it might seem relevant?The contract I believe have been demonsratably been presented as a safe fundation for open source style investments. If this is found to be false due to wizards undisclosed ability to retroactively close down certain material presented as "open", that appear to be matching common definitions of misrepresentation?I guess this topic might not be very relevant for the time being, as it appear most likely to be innocent misrepresentation, and from that as far as I can see the common outcome would be cancellation of contract. I hope noone currently would want that, and I guess the termination clause protects against any potential cascading effects of any such cancellation? (like if paizo decide to cancel their pf2 licencing trough this mechanism after confirming they didnt need it - that wouldn't affect third parties licensing pf2 content for their works)Maybe a bit more juicy spin on this might be if the severity of misrepresentation could somehow be considered higher for any ogl1.0a contracts entered after there are evidence wizards started contemplating the posibility of "deauthorization", and public disclosure of that fact (for i stance for anything published by a someone not offered the NDA for the 1.1 version, before the first leak)? That appear to enable potential claims of damages with respect to the investments those publishers has put into their products relying on the license?</blockquote>

Verification