I still don't understand why you changed your escrow rules about forks after taking these funds, and then claim your escrow thread and escrow services aren't related. 
You keep repeating this after Lauda had already stated numerous times that the rule change did not apply retroactively to the NVO escrow. Stop being an asshole just for the sake of being an asshole.
Further this term has no equity for the investors and as such is unenforceable in court.
All of this ignores the fact that it is very unlikely this would be a negotiated term at the time the ANN thread was created.
What are you on about with this pseudo-legalese bullshit? BCH did not exist at the time of the ICO. When the BCH fork happened it triggered a decision and it seems that a reasonable one was made, i.e. to redeem the fork and add it to the escrowed funds.