No, that's not it at all. You might have explained it at superficial level, but that's not what I asked for. Obviously we could banter for hours about what I meant - but how about writing an complete article on it, complete with references, dates, etc, and see how well your arguments stand up and are agreed with by the wider public?
It's not that I agree or disgree with you or the actions of given companies (and my part, I've stood up for ROL a great deal). In fact, I've expressed very little publicly stated opinion on the mess, except where I thought I might say something positive.
No, my problem is the blinkered view that it's entirely Castle's fault, when clearly all RISC OS companies to an extent, and certainly many users were very much complicit in the events of 2003 and 2004 (nor would I be quick to discount myself). If you want to diss Castle, that's fine - but only if, in equity, you name some of the disastrous actions taken by ROL (and indeed, STD, CJE, APDL, MicroDigital, etc, etc). I've not mentioned anything legal here, since IANAL, and neithr are you.
"they are close to buggering .. my favourite hobby". Castle haven't taken away your RiscPC, nor the rights to use your OS, nor your ability to use all the software you bought/wrote/obtained, so I can't really take that one on. If you want to blame anyone for that, blame Acorn - there's certainly plenty of reason you might.
So, finally, it's not that I disgree with you. It's that it's not really clear what I would disagree with you about, since you rarely make an effort to justify much of what you say here or elsewhere - which is a shame, as I know you have a great deal of insight into ROL that few others do.