Their opinion's obvious, I don't know what I think
"Something else that has troubled Emsisoft, when it comes to ransomware publicity, is decryptors."
As a company which makes money from providing services to people who have been infected, it's unsurprising that they don't welcome free decryptors. They have a point that, if one gets released, it's likely to stop working when one of the criminals locates it. However, if the flaw exists in the code but the person who found it doesn't release a decryptor, then a user has to hope that the company they go to happens to have it. If they go to someone who doesn't, they will think their files can't be decrypted locally and are more likely to pay the ransom. That funds criminals when the reasons are even weaker than usual, and it incentivizes companies to find decryption options and hide them from others so they can get more clients.
This would make for an interesting debate topic. What do you think?