While it's not ideal to have Linux being used in ways that aren't permitted by the license, it's not necessarily a violation of anyone's rights. These license-i

While it's not ideal to have Linux being used in ways that aren't permitted by the license, it's not necessarily a violation of anyone's rights. These license-incompatible uses of Linux are ongoing and readily apparent. There's a decent argument to be made that anyone contributing to Linux should have reasonably expected that their contributions would be used in this way, even if it wasn't in the license. Courts have to deal with resolving disputes where the terms of agreement weren't clearly documented all the time. Obviously that's a bit flimsy and it'd be preferable that the license be bulletproof, but it is what it is. It only becomes a problem if someone gets litigious. If that happens, and it's someone who's made a small contribution, then their code can probably just be purged and rewritten. If it happens with a bigger contributor, then the argument that they should have known what was going on becomes stronger. Hopefully it never becomes an issue. /shrug