Since HP already own 3COM, who spun off Palm in 2000 (with a first day valuation of something like 30 times what they are paying for it today), one could almost say that Palm is being bought back after 10 (not so happy) years as an independent company.

I don't think this characterization is fair, and I think you would have a hard time finding somebody who actually worked on Freenet to agree with you. Ian's orginal technical ideas for Freenet - as well as his vision - are very much still a big part of the architecture, and he could never be said to have abandoned it. In fact, time has vindicated many of his ideas to a far greater extent than I expected when we started working with them. You are right that the project has not yet solved the problems it set out to solve - but since it has wildly high ambitions, that should hardly be surprising. I think it has made a positive contribution all the same, if only to our understanding of many of the issues involved.

It is true that the press has had a tendency to paint Ian as the lone father of the project, but that is just the way to press works, and I have never seen Ian taking credit for other peoples work. And, to be honest, after you have done it a few times, you start realizing that dealing with the press isn't nearly as fun as it is cracked up to be, and that Ian has a knack for communication that most nerds, myself included, do not. I think Freenet has been very well served by Ian's ability to effectively communicate it's goals and gain attention -- among other things it has allowed several coders, of whom I was the first but not the last, to work full time for the project for certain periods. That said, I was a bit disappointed when the NYTimes ran a cover story on a presentation Ian and I held at Defcon and forgot to mention me at all, but I got over it :-).