If the companies being targeted hadn't violated the GPL, they wouldn't be subject to lawsuits like these. So this is "another reason" not to violate the GPL. I

If the companies being targeted hadn't violated the GPL, they wouldn't be subject to lawsuits like these. So this is "another reason" not to violate the GPL. It doesn't affect compliant GPL users. > I thought the whole idea of open source was to avoid litigious assholes. It sounds as though you're anti-GPL, so perhaps in this case the distinction between "open source" and GPL-style "free software" is relevant. The GPL imposes a significant requirement on users, which is that if you make changes to GPL software and distribute that software, you must make the source code to those changes available. This has nothing to do with "avoiding litigious assholes", so your assessment of the "whole idea" is not accurate when it comes to GPL software.