Following on what @apshamilton wrote, I want to picture this, maybe it's easier to understand. Think at Steemit's "ninja stake" as being land. Or any type of security. The owner of it uses that security to entice partnerships. In public writing, @ned committed to use that stake in a certain way in regard to witnesses, and that compelled them to invest.
It's like on some land he owned, @ned said: let's build a condominium. I'm putting the land, you're building. But, after 3 years and a lot of condominiums, he says: "Ups, I changed my mind, I'm going to give my land away". The guys that gets the land from @ned doesn't want to build condominiums, he wants to build a mall.
The problems are:
- @ned deceit towards the builders, they wouldn't have invested if the security wasn't there
- Justin Tron necessity to comply with any liabilities that he bought (hence the need of a due diligence, which, in my opinion, was made, the parties just decided to ignore it, miscalculating the response from the remaining parties: witnesses & community).
You can't stress too much that analogy. The property in question is a pile of fungible STEEM, not a specific land lot, and Ned had been already selling part of it those last years to fund expenses.
I would say that Ned had been selling parcels in one place to fund the building of the Steem condominium in some different place. Now Justin has come and bought the remaining parcels, but not differently that the other smaller investors before him.
Ned is still bound by his promises and must dedicate the proceeds of the sale to the Steem condominium. The encumbrance did not transfer to Justin, in the same way as it did not transfer to the other investors when they bought a parcel.
obligations are obligations, regardless of who they obligate and what they are obligations on. This is a clear principle at law.