Good old Adobe
Seems Adobe can no longer legally distribute InDesign in the US, because it incorporates third-party software that they didn't license properly. As the article points out, Adobe has been an ardent defender of their own intellectual property; they were the ones who pushed for Dmitri Sklyarov to be prosecuted under the DMCA.
In the interests of disclosure, I should note that the company I work for is not only a direct competitor of Adobe's, but currently involved in patent-infringement lawsuits with Adobe. (I know as little as possible about those suits, and couldn't talk about them in public anyway; but their existence is, afaIk, public knowledge, and I figured I ought to acknowledge them.) I should also note that I don't wish Adobe per se any ill; I adore their fonts, and I've been using FrameMaker (legal copies) for almost ten years now, for both professional and personal purposes. But I'm always a little bit amused at this sort of biter-bit scenario.
'Course, the article also notes that the next version of InDesign, which doesn't have the licensing problem, is due out soon. "You'd better stop distributing that software that you're about to make obsolete, or else!" And it notes that Adobe is continuing to distribute the software in other countries, which don't fall under US legal jurisdiction. (That looks to me like open contempt of the court, not in the legal sense but the ordinary meaning of the word. Thumbing their noses. Of course, Adobe claims they've done nothing wrong (they say they were told that the license agreement didn't mean what it said; I suppose I can sympathize with that, at least a little), so I suppose this is their way of bolstering that claim. But still, it would be much better PR to say "We don't feel we've done anything wrong, but we're stopping distribution of the software worldwide anyway as a gesture of good faith until this situation is resolved.") I wonder if this will end up amounting to anything more than a slap on the wrist.