Welcome to Slashdot.

Legally, the only way employment discrimination can be addressed (in cases where it's even illegal) is if it's overt, explicit, and documented. Anything short of that and the victim is left with nothing but legal fees, with even less of a chance of getting a new job after having a history of filing a discrimination suit. Eich wouldn't have to act directly, openly, or even knowingly for a corporate culture to build up around him and his authority that "coincidentally" rids him of those meddlesome gays, regardless of the platitudes written into the stated corporate policy. From a practical standpoint labor's only defense is to assume guilt until proof of innocence, and in this case Eich is still unrepentant.

It wasn't his marriage that got revoked.

Employment discrimination laws in the US are toothless (when they exist at all) and conservative lawmakers are doing what they can to gut them further. Conservative corporations have gone so far as to argue before the Supreme Court that management can be neither asked nor expected to keep their "sincerely held beliefs" separate from their business policy decisions. He can hire and fire at will, he can change policy on a whim, and he can even impose a hostile work environment to force out undesirables without saying a word or otherwise getting his hands dirty.

In the current corporate legal environment that leans heavily in their favor, there can be no expectation of separation of the public and the private for management. They simply have too much power over the lives of others to pretend anything else is possible.

Unlike earnings reports?

Eich doesn't suddenly find himself unwed, nor does he now have to leave the state to exercise all the rights and privileges he had yesterday.

You can still be fired for being homosexual in a majority of states.

"Mission Accomplished?"

First, it is a false equivalence to claim that actively reducing the legal standing of a class of citizens based exclusively on sexual orientation is merely "something that some might see as intolerant."

Secondly, Eich has (present tense) still not apologized. He made no meaningful effort or gesture to those he helped hurt and disenfranchise, just the typical corporate "Sorry if you're offended" spiel.

A great deal of this furor would have gone away if there was an act of genuine contrition on his part. But he couldn't manage to do what George Wallace and Robert Byrd could.

He hasn't had a marriage revoked.

It's all perfectly legal, as is firing someone for being homosexual in many states. And for that one (at least) Eich has worked to keep it that way.

Eich worked to criminalize what people do privately.

The CEO is the brand.

He had no need to. He'd already used government coercion to impose on the private lives of Mozilla's gay employees outside of the office as well as all California gays regardless of whether or not they worked for Mozilla.

And besides, at the time he did not have the power to impose on gay employees' professional lives to the extent that a CEO can.

But it would be at the cost of alienating all LGBTQ clients, contributors and their allies. OKCupid had a point: as an internet dating site they have an immediate business concern in gay rights.

No, Mozilla is now left with a heck of a lot of people with grudges and long memories. The fact that they thought promoting Eich was a good idea in the first place does not reflect well on them and will be remembered for a long time to come.

You don't sell a product and promote a brand by pissing people off.

They're called "clients."

Unless you run an explicitly religious organization, your "religious rights" do not extend to imposing your religious beliefs on your employees.

It revoked them.

No, Prop 8 won.

Eich sought to and succeeded to criminalize behavior between consenting adults, and succeeded. There is no realistic effort to have the state (any state) sanction Eich for his views.

He's still perfectly free to get a job at Hobby Lobby, Cracker Barrel, Chick-Fil-A, Target and Best Buy.

There is also a difference between calling for someone's ouster and working to criminalize behavior between consenting adults.

I've grown attached to my ten inch Android tablet. I'd be willing to wipe it and try installing free Windows on it myself, but between having to be under 9 inches and being OEM only, I'm not about to buy a whole new tablet, especially not in a form factor that's too small for my purposes, just so that I can run Windows.

Too little, too late, in both senses of the word "little."

I can see a business model where you'd sell these glasses from the backs of comic books.

Yes, needing to offer competitive wages to creative team members would have increased the cost of the individual project, but that need not affect the company's bottom line if it finds cost savings elsewhere, like in executive compensation.