Whether or not this means the ENTIRE Thesis codebase must be GPL’ed I can’t say
I can answer that. The quoted sentence is one of the biggest misunderstandings that developers make about the GPL. There is no obligation to make Thesis GPLed.
What's really happening rather, is that the author of Thesis is violating Wordpress's copyright. In order to fix the situation, they need to either stop using the copyrighted code, or reach some kind of agreement with the author of the code to obtain proper authorization. One way to obtain such authorization is by releasing their own code under GPL, but they could as well just negotiate a separate agreement.
GPL is not a virus that will force your code open without your consent.
GPL is not a virus that will force your code open without your consent.
In a lawsuit, could the copyright holder of a GPLed work force the opening of GPL-violating code as part of a GPL-violation settlement?
EDIT: I'm not a lawyer nor a student of the law. Presumably the copyright holder is entitled to some form of compensation, whether it's called a "settlement" or something else. Can the plaintiff dictate that the only form of compensation they will find sufficient is the defendant's release of the infringing code?
In my understanding, they could not, just as they could not force any other software pirate to do what they please.
It's just tht opening GPL-violating code is probably a cheaper alternative than paying damages (and as far as I know, there's a legal precedent for a GPL violator paying damages to the authors of the pirated code).
Alternatively, a GPL violator could negotiate a proprietary license for the same code from the author(s) of the GPLed code they used - it's questionable whether (a) you can hunt down all the authors, since open source licenses specifically enable collaborative development of software and (b) whether all the authors would agree to such a deal, especially after the company in question tried to pirate their code without giving anything back in return.
It could be part of a settlement (and I seem to remember a few cases where it has been in the past), but a settlement is an agreement between the two parties, nobody is "forced" to do anything.
Hypothetical: What happens if the agent that distributed the code to the public wasn't authorized to do so?
My view is that GPL infringements are no different than regular copyright infringements—the owner of the copyright is entitled to damages awarded by a court or an out of court settlement of some kind. This may or may not include GPL'ing the derivative work.
I can answer that. The quoted sentence is one of the biggest misunderstandings that developers make about the GPL. There is no obligation to make Thesis GPLed.
What's really happening rather, is that the author of Thesis is violating Wordpress's copyright. In order to fix the situation, they need to either stop using the copyrighted code, or reach some kind of agreement with the author of the code to obtain proper authorization. One way to obtain such authorization is by releasing their own code under GPL, but they could as well just negotiate a separate agreement.
GPL is not a virus that will force your code open without your consent.