Apples to oranges. The Mouse is protected by copyright; GPL-ed software is protected by copyleft. When you distribute copyleft software, you're explicitly grant

Apples to oranges. The Mouse is protected by copyright; GPL-ed software is protected by copyleft. When you distribute copyleft software, you're explicitly granting rights to your downstream users. You can't just decide one day to retroactively change the terms. > And for those who undoubtly miss to understand the issue ... Clearly, you misunderstand the issue. Neo4j specifically told people to modify their recipe however they please as long as the license is respected. Yes, this is the very license that allows this. It's a completely different (and undefendable) issue that they did so by committing the legal equivalent of copying code from Stack overflow and not even reading it. The law doesn't work like code does and you can't just claim, "Sorry, there was a bug. You will be forced to download a software update." when it comes to copyrights and contracts.