Maybe they should have stated this a bit clearer, but I believe "attempts to exploit our permissive licensing to hijack our work" does not mean that a fellow developper tried to distribute a modified version of their work under an open license to the benefit of users.

I believe instead it means: some shaddy businesses tried to hastily build a clunky, closed source product with which to fool less technical users into some sort of technical dead-end that could be commercially (or politically, it's 2026) exploited.

Or maybe I project on them my own frustrations with the MIT license. In any case, I welcome the change consisting on puting freedom back in the front seat.

I mean, for sure, if they are worried about someone building a shoddy product on top of asahi, and then not open sourcing their shoddy additions then GPL will fix their problem.

However, I think, what they want is for people to stop making those shoddy additions altogether. And open source does not solve that problem because that's exactly what open source exists to allow.

Very specifically, it was (allegedly) DDH. He's got some VC funding and all now, and is making some linux distro for MacBooks.