In the end The Foundation will be there to please those that pay and not to protect or advance the protocol.
I think this kind of critic doesn't stand.
There's nothing stopping people with deep pockets from financing developments that please them
right now. This organization per se won't make it easier or harder for them.
In the end, what matters is who people (=bitcoin users) trust. If well intended developers see the foundation has been bought by "an evil guy", they can simply leave it. Their reputation will leave with them.
The actual danger is not people buying up the organization. The actual danger is bitcoin users trusting this organization more than they should. The simple fact they don't accept anonymous memberships is already a reason to be wary, IMHO.
The structure of the foundation and the current state of the bitcoin protocol is why I believe the foundation does make it easier for people with bad intentions to act, it gives them a ready to use and central point of attack with a legal structure to be co-opted.
As to users trust, I agree but the users don't have a choice. At this point in time they have to trust software put out by the foundation. There simply is no complete alternative for the to turn to.
In the past I gave Gavin trust as a person, I can't say I will do the same for Gavin the employee of 'the foundation'.
Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike the idea of a foundation but the timing and structure of BF seems off to me. On the other hand it might just wake people up out of there complacent state and push them to actually do something about it.