I have posted extensively on many facets of the Lawsuits on the USCF Issues Forum. My position has been and is pretty clear. I support the USCF and its co-defendants in these actions. I find no merit to the cases that have been filed against the USCF. It goes without saying that the USCF cannot afford this litigation. Unfortunately, the USCF can neither afford not to defend itself vigorously.
I think that these Lawsuits are amenable to settlement, and any settlement should be made taking into account economics, the likelihood of sucess on the merits, and the likelihood of collecting should the litigation be played out to a victory in the end. There is risk in all litigation, and the USCF should be risk averse. I do not believe that we should or need to worry about the reputation of the USCF or any party related to the USCF in these actions, as I think the filings against the USCF are obviously without substance. In short, the USCF's and its allies' good names are intact, and we do not need to spend USCF dollars further proving so. In settling the cases, however, we do not need to make any concessions to those who've sued the Federation. There's no need to apologize and no need to pay $1. If given, it is likely both of these concessions would be used against the USCF for years to come.
I am aware that some want to play the cases out for the sake of justice and to recover the USCF's expenses. These two points should resonate in some degree with just about everyone. Nevertheless, my view is that playing the cases out is not necessary, entails risk, and may mean spending money that will not be recovered. I want the USCF's dollars to go toward furthering chess. We're an NFP organization. We should not be afraid to defend ourselves, but scorched earth litigation is not what we do.
I believe that the bringing of a lawsuit by a former member of the USCF EB was a monumental mistake, and that the course that has been run by the USCF has been a good and decent one. The resolve of the USCF has been demonstrated, and the EB elected most recently appears ready and able to move forward with the business of chess. I think that the conclusion of the cases should be left in the hands of our present leadership and the USCF's attorneys. Anyone who has a view on how the cases should be concluded should make his or her opinion known. I know that many in a leadership position read the Issues Forum on the USCF's website.
[My comments above do not apply to the Book & Equipment (B&E) dispute. There's not sufficient publicly available information for me to make a meaningful comment.]