[BlueNgold]

It's the correct decision - like it or not.
The owner of a copyright has the clear legal right to determine what modifications, if any, are allowed before the distribution of their work product.
If this business was modifying a copyrighted work without permission then their actions were illegal - despite their good intentions, and despite possible financial detriment to the copyright holder because of a lost segment of audience.
As I understand it - one of the often overlooked elements of intellectual property laws is the obligation to defend against infringement. I can't cite them off the top of my head, but I have read cases where knowledgeable complacency was considered by the courts tantamount to passive permission. If any of our legal eagles care to correct or clarify this point - please do - I am certainly open to continuing education.

[antiRepublicrat]

As I understand it - one of the often overlooked elements of intellectual property laws is the obligation to defend against infringement.

You can't lose copyright and patent in general since they have specific times of protection. But they are affected by the doctrine of laches. It's an equity (fairness) doctrine that says neglect to pursue a claim for a long time prejudices the person when he finally brings the claim. Waiting too long doesn't automatically preclude defending the coyright, but it can get one specific infringement case thrown out of court.