Separately (really stretching the edges of my understanding here as I have not kept up with any court cases, settlements, or other ways this has come up and bee

Separately (really stretching the edges of my understanding here as I have not kept up with any court cases, settlements, or other ways this has come up and been resolved), it's my understanding that the nature of dynamic linking in Windows DLLs is seen by some as a proper boundary against the full GPL, such that only an affected DLL would require its entire source code available rather than the entire program. I believe the justification in such a case is that the DLL is serving it's intended/entire purpose and could be replaced. I'm far from an expert but thought this was an interesting technical issue affecting open source licensing (perhaps similar to closed-source kernel drivers?). If anyone has recent experience sorting this out "in the real world" (amicably or not!) I'd love to hear about it.