Heh. It's interesting, the number of people who apparently didn't "get" the point of the article. Yes, SF is free, and use of its services are a privilege and not a right. However, once a project has been hosted there, getting it off again is a major hassle, so the 'vote with your feet' solution is of limited utility. They're arguably the most visible host of open software on the 'net; if they 'get away' with jerking around the developers, it sends a signal that's bad for the entire community. And it's hardly in their best interest to alienate the users.
So what's the point of the article? I suppose a notice to developers who use SF but may not have been aware of this change, and that by extension they shouldn't expect any guaranty of service in this or any other areas; in other words, 'beware! this could happen to some facility you care about!'. And that SF is in the service of VA, and not the community. And a twit to SF so that perhaps they'll either answer problems reported to them, or (gasp!) address them. :-)
As for cmiller's remarks.. well, just because he doesn't believe in a cause doesn't make it unworthwhile to others. :-)