Markee wrote >"I thought the article implied RO Open might get access to ther source code in lieu of backpay."
The article does indeed imply that that's the case, but is that substantiated anywhere independantly, and surely if Castle feel obliged to "open source" RO as a means of "paying" RISC OS Open/Tematic former employees then what PW (or his shares) says doesn't matter a jot does it? Which brings me back to my original question about the whole shares/open sourcing mallarkey.
nx wrote >"If PW did convice Castle to Open source while he had his shares, then there would be no incentive for RO Open to buy the shares after the event - why bother"
Indeed, which was the whole point of my line of argument. Buying/not buying the shares has (IMHO) *no* effect if the current article is correct. In fact in one prior Drobe article it appeared as if one of the RO Open participants wasn't even aware of PW putting his shares up for sale when they started their little endeavour.
I quote - When asked if there was any connection between Pattotek [Peter Wild's company] selling off its Castle stake and the appearance of RISC OS Open, Steve [Revill] added: "I don't know what the rumours are but I only learned about the proposed sale of shares by Pete Wild on Thursday July 6. I can't really think of any way that this will affect what RISC OS Open is planning."