Oh, I wish, because the discussion about, centralized software distribution, and software supply chains will have to be had and it cannot be separated from the open-source profits discussion.[1]
In my opinion some take aways from this should be:
1. As users we should do better avoiding unilateral dependencies. Specifically, every central repository we are using for free is a risk. Be it wordpress.org, npm or crates.io.[2]
2. As open-source author, decide if your project is a charity or not. Expect people to be angry, when you change your mind, even if the law is on your side.
3. Defend your trademarks vigorously from day one. Being lenient in the hope of free brand awareness will bite you.
[1] I am a bit disappointed that LWN, which I hold in high regard, recognized this, but still decided to ride the drama train. LWN I am used to better things from you.
[2] Java's convention of using domains in package names was ugly, inconvenient and did not solve the problem completely (see the issues around javax and sun packages), but it gave us a far better chance to avoid a dangerous dependency.
EDIT: I am tempted to add a fourth point, even if it is not 100% applicable to the case:
4. Don't expect people to understand open source licensing. Neither the authors who decided on a license in the first place, nor corporate lawyers - especially corporate lawyers.