Well that proves at least someone feels threatened enough by the Bitcoin fork's possible success. Interesting move on the counter party parts, I would expect something more along the lines of a counter point to Mike Hearn's blog posting rather than this.
I also find it kind of sobering the kind of enemies you would have if you're fork of a project managed to "kill" its viability.
I don't see it as a issue / question of whether or not the forks possible success, but the way which the fork is being pushed without wide and near unanimous acceptance (assuming that was a core principal and vision).
If the original intent was to made it super hard to change the rules, but now the rules are being changed by a 'few in power', I could see how that would be concerning in general.
Regardless, this is rather interesting to watch play out. Especially for all the companies that have popped up.
I also find it kind of sobering the kind of enemies you would have if you're fork of a project managed to "kill" its viability.