While your statement of 12(b)(6) is correct, I don't think your analysis of fact vs. law is deep enough. The kinds of facts that court assumes to be true for a

While your statement of 12(b)(6) is correct, I don't think your analysis of fact vs. law is deep enough. The kinds of facts that court assumes to be true for a 12(b)(6) motion are that the defendant _did not_ sign a contract. The court assumes that the defendant _did_ use the software in a manner that violates the GPL. However, determining that the GPL is an enforceable contract is a matter of _law_. That is not something that would be assumed to be true, and is a point that the court may make a decision on at this stage. That is, the court _assumes_ the defendant violated the GPL, but still needed to come to the decision that the defendant _was not allowed_ to violate the GPL. From my brief reading, the court has made the determination that—if the alleged facts are true—the defendant was not allowed to violate the GPL.