I can't possibly imagine where you got the idea that I was insisting that no one is violating the GPL. Seems to me that you are having some problem reading.
I discussed Microsoft more at length than say IBM, who has billions of dollars invested in Linux and GPL software, because Microsoft was a bit less obvious. Clearly IBM works hard to respect the GPL; it's more interesting that Microsoft is held in its constraints.
But either would be an excellent example of the very substantial teeth in the GPL.
It is you are is asking everyone to make an unreasonable leap of logic - that IBM would risk billions, or that Microsoft would feel constrained from its usual embrace extend and extinguish tactics, on the strength of a license that would not stand up in court.
The GPL has 'teeth'... Evidence = 'Because MS hasn't stolen GPL code'? LOL! More likely, they just don't want to pollute their products with amateur free crap.
When a GPL license holder shuts down Red Flag's website and gets a cash settlement, come back and then we'll talk. Until then, GPL looks like nothing more than an appeal to the 'honor system'.