- Edited
Dan_Ryder Imo there's no point explaining the difference between de jure and de facto in this setting. I'm confused as to why you would bring that up. Usually that distinction is made for things like segregation. The terminology of de facto is usually used when there was a problem with creating something like a contract, corporation, or marriage. Maybe they teach law differently in your country, idk. If you are indeed correct that they've never enforced certain clauses, then that's certainly relevant information. But it is also not relevant to my point.
You are right that the first thing one would do is to research precedents. But that's if one were hired or writing an article or the like. I'm commenting on a forum. I think there's confusion as well since you mention me commentint on the contract. I didnt even read the contract or talk about any of its clauses. I don't have a client asking me to help with their IP or contract dispute with webnovel. Again, I was simply commenting that in general a company acts as it will and the individual then has to fight back if they dont like it. That's it. I saw someone talking about the legal process and how that would constrain a corporation's actions and I found that analysis did not reflect my understanding. I was not analyzing the contract nor seeking to explain the entirety of international contract law. Nor was I researching who would win a dispute. Im simply talking about the most basic realities of the process.
Btw if you read my previous reply you'll see I advise prospective authors to consult a legal professional. At that point that legal professional would do the research to see how the contract or similar contracts have been treated and see what the precedents are.