Say what you want: GPL works. The Alternative for Samsung would have been to lose all rights to distribute Android.
So, how do you think this would have gone with a non-copyleft license?
Besides: GPLv2 already contains an implicit patent grant, so Samsung had better work this out — with the explicit GPL release (GPLv2 or later), they are obliged to ensure that downstream recipients aren’t restricted - as long as Samsung distributes the code¹. See http://en.swpat.org/wiki/GPLv2_and_patents
¹: For Samsung this would at least be damage-minimization (of their own infringement): If Microsoft starts the patent-war, Samsung won’t lose the right to all GPL code in Linux, just the right to distribute this part (and the code is officially out).
Yep, looks like Samsung forgot to remove the "or any later version" part. Looks like a mistake, since the Linux kernel itself doesn't require it.
Originally Posted by ArneBab