Their actual GPL violation was, to my mind, quite small and not worth all this fight -- it would have been far cheaper for them to do that one extra thing that the GPL demanded, since they were doing most of it already.
But for some unknown reason they decided to dig their heels in! The moron who was arguing for them even tried to say that the GPL violates anti-trust laws!
There is a saying I often use: never ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity.
So, how stupid do you have to be to accuse the GPL of the kind of stuff that only entities like AT&T and IBM (in the old days) and Microsoft (recently) have been convicted of?
Or is it perhaps malice this time, not stupidity?