Are you saying that because he invented something that changed the world, his misbehavior should be ignored? If that's what you're saying, I wonder where you would draw the line: an affair? Embezzling? Murder? At what point would the misbehavior be so bad that it should not be excused by his past inventions? At what point does the inventor not get to use "But I'm changing the world" as an excuse?

Or perhaps I'm misreading you. You did, after all, open with saying that you agree with my comment that you're replying to. So if your only point is "the board didn't care, that was an excuse to get rid of him" and you're not excusing his behavior, then sure, I agree with that statement. His behavior was an open secret among the company, after all; they had to have known, but were willing to ignore it when it was convenient to them. Which is immoral of them, let me add. I agree with you that that's what they did. I do NOT agree (and I hope you're not saying) that it was ethical or moral of them to ignore it until it became publicly known.