@Danramos Its interesting to note that Finland doesn't yet have something akin to Class Action Suit, I understand this is currently under discussion/proposal. I believe it is important to ensure that any incorrect statements wherever they are found are sufficiently countered with facts so that they may not be used in the future in any potential case. Lumiaman constantly tries to restate history and is constantly trying to steer blame away from Elop as if trying to set out a record that no one else recognises. Now, I'm not saying that this is what is happening here but the position is remarkably similar to actions taken by Darl in SCO v IBM, Darl used information previously stated in forums and tried referring to it later to support their position. In all cases the information presented when analysed proved to be heresay and falsehoods. Exactly the type of activity we have seen from Lumiaman. Now this may be the ultimate in paranoia but then the same could have been said before the SCO v IBM case when, for example, no one noticed at the time a slightly adjusted version of the Unix/Linux timeline charts had been posted which later made the press when published by SCO and used by them to try to support a completely false view of the pedigree of various components. I would hate to think that any falsehoods presented here by Lumiaman might remotely be used to help Elop should Nokia shareholders ever take them to task. rgds ps. I can't help but think how great the N900 would have looked today if Nokia had not been blindsided by Elop and Microsoft into 3 years of deadend products.