Already having this discussion in the TTRPG thread!
As for people trying to use the old 1.0a OGL, like Paizo, every lawyer I have heard talk about this is very skeptical they can change the terms of the original “perpetual license” granted in that with a 1.1 update, even with the creative legal language of “unauthorized” in 1.1 trying to end the perpetual license they had already granted. I guess for contract law, the courts almost always give a disadvantage to the license creator, as it was their job to make the language of that license clear, and the precedent of “perpetual” in license law is 35 years. This is especially the case for OGL 1.0a, because it is an open contract, and it is known that the licensee(s) had no ability to negotiate terms when it was created. It is literally all on WOTC.
So, the ability of them to “un-authorize” something they have allowed people to use as a “perpetual” license is suspect, as it contradicts their written terms. Additionally, there have been messages from the former WOTC employees who wrote the OGL 1.0a that it was meant to be “perpetual” and was written with that intent in mind.
Anyway, it will likely either go to court, or WOTC will back down. They will have a very difficult time explaining how they have the ability to essentially revoke a license they granted in perpetuity.
They may also back down, because a legal case over their OGL would bring a lot of attention over to what they actually can license. A lot of the OGL uses very generic game mechanics terms which there has been plenty of legal precedent over how you cannot copyright generic game mechanics. Nobody has questioned the OGL on this, because it was completely free and open to use (as long as you followed the generous and free terms). Them locking the OGL down will likely bring a lot more scrutiny over what they can and cannot copyright.
They have broken the un-easy peace, and it will probably only be bad for them, especially in the short term.