At least the SRD5 is now irrevocably in the creative commons. So the situation now is somewhat better, they can't simply revoke the license anymore for that document.
They changed the underlying law of licenses that makes gratuitous licenses revocable at will independent of the content of the license? How?
Isn't the requirement of attribution the consideration in cases like this? Which would make it not gratuitous? Here's open source lawyer and HN user 'DannyBee saying so, for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14557737
> By simply publishing it, we place it under an irrevocable Creative Commons license.
I'd be very surprised if they still had their rights to revoke the license after explicitly saying otherwise.
So... well, I'm not going to be buying anything new from WotC any time soon. I'd say anything from Hasbro, but that's such a big umbrella I'm not sure I could consistently figure out all the subsidiaries.