Anyone who produces intellectual property for the express purpose of making money from it has to examine whether they are actually doing so as effectively as they would like. Hasbro didn't acquire the property rights to D&D in order to fulfill someone's desire to play a game for free; they acquired it to command market share and make profits.
Clearly they have evaluated the OGL and SRD introduced with 3.0 that allowed them to command that market share and have decided, at least at this time, to not be so open with 4.0. If a publishing house wishes to use 4.0, they have to ascribe to the terms of the OGL. If they happen to also want to publish 3.x material, they have to pay for rights to both.
What is so eggregious about this? It's standard business practice, and presumably both parties are in it to make money. If a publishing house doesn't think it can make money whilst subscribing to two D&D licenses, they should focus their efforts on one or the other.
I don't understand how the OGL affects an enterprise like Myth-Weavers, which is probably more on topic for this thread. Obviously, this is a community resource and not a for-profit entity, and it would be nice if OGL conditions were relaxed for this sort of enterprise. Maybe they will be in the future, if they aren't already.