What I see is the head of a company making unsubstantiated legal accusations against a potential competitor in order to sway public opinion towards his own product.
I agree completely. It has always intrigued me that he alleges illegal behavior in public forums rather than simply pursuing the matter through proper legal channels if in fact there are grounds to do so. If he cannot pursue the matter through the courts, either because it would be premature or because he doesn't really have grounds, then this stream of allegations in public is inappropriate and only damages his own reputation and, as a practical matter, perhaps reduces the chances of a ruling in his favor as well. If he can pursue the issue, then he should once and for all, rather than engage in what looks more like the work of a PR hack than a legal counsel.
Of course it's nice to hear directly from the people at these companies and I wouldn't want to discourage that, but it seems to me that one of the principals alleging illegal behavior by another is inappropriate. BTW, it wouldn't make a difference to me if the roles were reversed and other people were doing the accusing and being accused. It's just unseemly and appears to be dubious on legal grounds.
-- gary_c
