I'm not sure that the argument is the important part of this article; a lot of it was about lamentation. The author admits to having little knowledge of patent

I'm not sure that the argument is the important part of this article; a lot of it was about lamentation. The author admits to having little knowledge of patent laws, and is offering their story for perspective. As far as I can tell there were two points being made: 1. Apple might have been premature in pulling the app from the App Store. Not being under any immediate legal obligation to block the app, nor a ruling on whether there was infringement. 2. It might be unethical to go as far as having the app removed from the store this early on in their litigation. That move might take speech away from people who depend on Speak for Yourself. I'm not saying those are good arguments, but they are what they are. Also worth noting is the cost of SfY vs PRC products: - The Speak for Yourself app cost $190, on top of the price of an iPad. The least expensive PRC product is $2,595. It seems geared towards the very young, or otherwise those with a fairly limited speech/thought faculties, hence they call it "SpringBoard Lite". The rest of PRC's products range from $7500 - $15,000. I mention the prices because I wondered why the author couldn't just go buy one of PRC's products. They may be prohibitively expensive.