I can't figure out why ROL wouldn't pay their royalties. I can understand that there is some disagreement over whether CTL have broken their original license with ROL, and ROL's possible breach when it comes to +Printers and other contractual issues, but it seems plain daft for a company to simply stop paying owed royalties. The way to settle these legal problems definately wasn't to stop paying royalties.... it gave Castle a major reason cancel the license. If what Castle are alleging is correct, it would seem ROL don't want to help themselves.
One reason ROL might think CTL are in the wrong (CTL have broken their license with ROL) is that the Element 14 License might have had clauses against anti-competition. Below is an excerpt from ROL's Mission Statement released in 1999.
"(ROL will) Seek to find licensees for RISC OS outside the traditional Acorn markets subject to any non-competitive clauses from Element 14."
Perhaps ROL think that by CTL owning RISC OS and being a hardware manufacturer, they are breaking these "non-competitive clauses", or am I reading this wrong? Does "non-competitive" mean against any anti-competitive business by companies, or does it mean something else?