Their entire argument is bullshit. Good find on a product they seem to like endorsing.
Honestly, I do not see what the fuss is all about. If you ran a corporation or a 501(c)(3) non proft, the board of directors do whats best for the organization. If you had an organization and realized that a certain action could cause trouble would you take the risk of doing that action? The legal concerns they express are valid. I think I would rather see them fight battles rather than be a victim of a battle.
Even if they don't take on a case regarding bitcoin, doesnt mean that they wont submit an amicus curiae in support of bitcoin if/when a case does come down.
This is just one guy's opinion but I just see them avoiding a big mess..
That would be perfectly fine logic if it was a 501(c)(3) for saving cute endangered animals or something, but they are supposed to be on the FRONTIER, not acting like some scared org not wanting to meddle with something that has unknown legal implications. They are supposed to be pioneering this kind of stuff and advocating it.