Most people following the saga know that there was never a consensus about 2X. A majority for it yes, but not a consensus. If the choice is following people with untested 2X code in a hard fork, or staying with core, we don't know if there would still be a majority for the fork.
Not that I disagree, but your reply seems unrelated to my thesis.
My point was that the whole thing can be framed as in the OP. Then ethically and morally there's no reason to follow through with the agreement you've signed under duress.
Even politically (to maintain your reputation as someone who keeps his word, for example), there's a face-saving way out by pointing to the duress.
I doubt these companies saw themselves as being blackmailed, but they actually were (in an arguably extreme definition of the word). Once they point to the duress, they need not feel obliged to keep their agreement.
