<i>I agree that X is not true, but object strongly to the idea that it would lead to Y.</i><p><i>If</i> the courts threw up their hands and said &quot;It is literally impossible to adjudicate this issue of the binary kernel module&quot;, then who is left to enforce the copyright law?  <i>If</i> a court said that, and an individual&#x2F;company wanted to ignore the GPL, then they could put all of their code into binary modules.  If a company&#x27;s proprietary code is in a binary format, there is no one available to enforce licensing rules, and the company knows those two facts, then what reason does that company have to fear from the GPL?<p>Please provide an answer to both questions independently, so they are both addressed and no assumptions are left invisible.  My answers are &#x27;no one&#x27; and &#x27;none&#x27;.  I&#x27;d like to hear what you think the answers to those questions are, then I&#x27;d also be curious to hear what you think the logical outcome of the binary kernal module license issue being unenforceable would be.