Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4315372" data-attributes="member: 42582">As others have said, this is not true. One way to look at it: in any contract which is not fully executed on your side you give up at least one right, namely, the right not to perform whatever it is that you have contracted to perform.I think that some posters on this issue are getting confused about the various protections that apply in many jusridictions in respect of consumer contracts (which are intended to prevent consumers being exploited by suppliers of goods and services who rely upon sometimes-punitive standard form contracts). These protections typically don't apply to commercial contracts such as the OGL or GSL.This is not strictly true either. Many jurisdictions regard certain contractual terms as unenforceable for being overly punitive. That is not to suggest that any part of clause 6 of the GSL is such a term.The law that prohibits enforcement of agreements in restraint of trade is another complex matter. Clause 6 of the GSL does not require any person - natural or artificial - to promise not to engage in their profession, or to promise not to compete in the RPG market. All it does is require a promise of a party to the GSL not to subsequently publish certain licensed material as a party to the OGL.What the contract says is that, if you violate the obligations in question, then you no longer enjoy the permissions (= licence) that the contract granted you. What is terminated are the permissions that the licence granted, not the obligations that you incurred by entering into the contract - which included certain obligations not to make use of the OGL. Those obligations endure.This isn't quite right - for example, many property rights (eg freehold) last in perpetuity.When it comes to an agreement like the GSL, I would think that the most likely way in which the agreement will be brought to an end will be by the dissolution of one of the contracting companies.This isn't true. Just one example: the whole point of the OGL and the GSL is that WoTC waive, in respect of licensed parties, certain rights with respect to their intellectual property.None of the foregoing is legal advice. I teach in an Australian law school, but am by no means an expert in Australian contract law, let alone US contract law. It is just an attempt to put to rest some of the more extreme misinformation being put about in this thread.</blockquote>

Verification