If it was brought up to their attention by someone ("the situation", as GKH has called it) and so they released the code, then I think it really was a violation... even if no one involved wants to call it that way.
The thing is that it's not just a violation... but a violation from a company that prides itself of saying that we GNU/Linux users are in debt to them and their shareholders for patent infrigments... and then these guys come and use GPL just like that.
So much for "GPL creeps into code". I bet the code didn't get ther by itself... it was "crept" by their own developers, I'd think.
Member since:
2005-12-18
If it was brought up to their attention by someone ("the situation", as GKH has called it) and so they released the code, then I think it really was a violation... even if no one involved wants to call it that way.
The thing is that it's not just a violation... but a violation from a company that prides itself of saying that we GNU/Linux users are in debt to them and their shareholders for patent infrigments... and then these guys come and use GPL just like that.
So much for "GPL creeps into code". I bet the code didn't get ther by itself... it was "crept" by their own developers, I'd think.