Saw this the other day. Pretty ridiculous. So many companies just sue instead of partnering and trying to reap the benefits. Of course there are certain situations where you need to protect your trademark/yourself. To me this isn't one of them obviously. Big companies have everything they could want: smart hackers, some traction, and a better product... yet they just go and sue.

Maybe Reuters is trying to be noble by getting courts to declare EULAs unenforceable.

But probably not.

Ah, blog comments:

I’m afraid I must disagree, at least in part. While I agree that Thomson/Reuters should have put more effort into web interoperability, I am troubled by the use of federal dollars to support the development of a competitive product (even free ones).

We'd better tell the GHC folks to stop working on Haskell! It's cutting into Sun's Java revenue!

Anyway, I wonder what law they are using to prevent the reverse-engineering for interoperability? Last time I checked, that is explicitly allowed by the DMCA. If it is an EULA thing, I would be happy to take credit for reverse-engineering the file format; I have never used EndNote. (BibTeX + emacs is much easier to use.)