Microsoft's Sam Ramji, senior director of platform strategy, blogged about the GPL violation story yesterday, clearly stating that it is not true. "Microsoft's decision was not based on any perceived obligations tied to the GPLv2 license," Ramji writes.
He also carefully repeats what the real reasons for the code drop were - according to Microsoft, of course. "For business reasons and for customers, we determined it was beneficial to release the drivers to the kernel community under the GPLv2 license through a process that involved working closely with Greg Kroah-Hartman, who helped us understand the community norms and licensing options surrounding the drivers."
I guess we'll never truly know what the real story is behind all this, and I understand some of you may wonder why it's relevant. Well, the relevance lies in that if the code drop was brought on by a GPL violation, we probably won't see more Microsoft code donated to the Linux kernel on a regular basis.