Your statement is centered on one argument:
Originally Posted by GMWestermeyer
The problem ethically, IMO, was the tournaments, which cross the line from fair use to published.
This argument sees organizing a tournament like organizing a theatre play as a form of publishing. Surely a theatre play needs the allowance (and usually has to pay for) of the author.
But are these two comparable? I dont think so.
But if that is the statement, than why would it be allowed to organize a DBA 3.0 tournament without permission? Or, hell beware, making a campaign day in public and using DBA 3.0 with house rules?
Obviously buying a rules set gives you the right, to use the rules for play. Even in public! And even with a house rule ammendement. I dont see, that Barker is able to take that right away, after it was given by selling the rules in the first place.