Do you understand that these two statements are contradictory?
Already explained upthread.
Since David has flip-flopped on IOTA being a cryptocurrency and not being a cryptocurrency, don't you understand that people might be apprehensive when you give contradictory statements? How can you on one hand say that "they will get what was promised" and on the other ask, "Who was promised 'profit-shares'?"? This is why I said that I doubt JINN holders who do not redeem their assets for IOTA will receive any profit-shares. It sounds like you are questioning if anybody was promised "profit-shares" at all.
He follows legal advice of the lawyer, so he is fine I think. Read
http://188.138.57.93/tos.pdf and
http://188.138.57.93/risk.pdf if you need the details.
Additionally, regardless of my feelings towards David, you know that you are legally protected from EU/US securities laws, but he is not. Do you really think that it is right to allow him to string himself out and bear the full burden of any legal repercussions brought about by your joint endeavour? Anybody with common sense can tell from his statements that he is woefully ignorant about securities laws and his legal responsibilities.
It's hard to prove that David violated EU/US laws (which didn't happen) when everybody knows that JINN was initiated solely by me. I doubt a USA prosecutor will spend a lot of time on a case where monopoly money (NXT) were handed over to a guy from Russia (which hides Snowden the Enemy #1) whose official reply to any official requests from USA/EU is "FUCK OFF". And all this just for a zero chance
to charge 50'000 USD penalty? I don't think you believe in this.