a reimplementation that copies the interface has no need to copy the license. GPL people just get scared because they know their license can't prevent people from rewriting their own software (of course, such an idea is ridiculous).
the GPL is not a perfect license, there is no such thing.
I might be too harsh, but it is not so trustworthy that they found bugs within the original sudo after less than a year of effort. those other devs had over 40 years to find it
the source is open, it's just not open source. You can't be pedantic about things they didn't say, and you don't get to retroactively define open to only be definable by OSI.
what are you actually arguing? because he is compelled to answer questions, why is that different from being compelled to read a headline for a question of "did you write that/approve that" etc.
he agreed to take the stand, he agreed to everything. what would the lawyer object with "your honor, they're making him read" lmao
they are not lying, apple was quite literally sued successfully in France and are currently settling class action lawsuits over the exact thing.
apple can say otherwise but that doesn't mean you need to regurgitate their lies. Apple only slowed the phones after a software update, not as a natural response to battery degradation. if that were the case it wouldn't be unique to that specific phone anyways.
God, apple makes good hardware but the people who just makes things up to stand in the fire of criticism are the strangest