You still singing the old DMM-song, and haven't explained what is illegal about it.
Fact is that GPL code can legally be forked, and GPL quite clearly states that any derivative work MUST be GPL too. Enigma was GPL from the start, Enigma2 was dual-licensed from the start. Which have given DMM a loop-hole to create a closed-source image.
The original licence stated:
The 'enigma2 core' is licensed under a proprietary license.
The 'enigma2 core' contains all files in this sourcetree except plugins in lib/python/Plugins which carry their own LICENSE file.
Those plugins are licensed under their own license. This proprietary license does not allow you to compile, modify or do anything with this sources. You are allowed, however, to distribute an unmodified version of the sources, including all license statements.
Additionally, this proprietary license will essentially allow you one thing:
You are free to take *THIS* version of enigma2, and derive a version which will be licensed under the GPLv2. If you're doing this, be sure to insert proper licencening statements to ensure that it doesn't get mixed up with the proprietary version.
The derived version can be, of course, modified, distributed etc. in modified forms, however, you have to publish all changes you made in source form if you are distributing a binary version. Exact details can be read in the GPLv2.
If you wish do send us patches to be included in the "official sourcetree", which will be based on the proprietary license, you have to agree that your code will be licensed under the proprietary license.
Note that "official sourcetree" just means the version which is included in the main developer CVS hosted at, or on behalf of, Dream Multimedia.
You are, of course, free to make patches to a GPL-only version. These changes won't show up in the "official release" then, though.
Additionally, this license allows Dream Multimedia to change terms of this license. If you don't like a change in this license, you are free to derive a GPL version from a previous version, of course.
The same goes for plugins. You can decide whether you want your plugins to be compatible to the "official release" (so you must explicitely allow "linking" code licensed under the proprietary license to your code), or you can decide that your code should be only linked to the GPL'ed ("free") version of enigma2. Your plugins are also allowed to be closed-source, though we strongly discourage this for technical reasons.
Then, DMM changed it to
Enigma2 is property of Dream Multimedia GmbH. All copyrights with regard to Enigma2 belong to Dream Multimedia GmbH only. The copyrights with regard to plug-ins may belong to third parties.
Any existing version of Enigma2, original or derived, may only be used by the owner of a Dreambox for private purposes only.
Explicitly, no one is allowed to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute or compile any version of Enigma2 for commercial purposes.
Explicitly, no one is allowed to use any version of Enigma2 for offering, distributing or selling any hardware or box product offering Enigma2 functionality.
Explicitly, no one is entitled to make any commercial use - directly or indirectly - of Enigma2.
By downloading and/or using any version of Enigma2 you indicate your acceptance of the terms of this allowance. Dream Multimedia GmbH is entitled to change the terms of this allowance.
Any intended use of Enigma2 going beyond the present allowance has to be presented to Dream Multimedia GmbH and depends on the explicit agreement of Dream Multimedia GmbH. Feel free to contact Dream Multimedia GmbH.
So we did what was explicitly granted in the original license: we forked the Enigma2 repository with the state of the day before the change of license, and made that GPLv2.
Anyone can do the same, or use OpenPLi as the basis, create a driver set for a particular box, and they are in business. That's how it works. I understand perfectly that DMM would prefer to have a few more Ferrari's on their doorstep, but then they should have thought about it before they gave Enigma2 a GPL license.
You also seem to forget that if it were not for the efforts of the opensource teams (Gemini, PLi, Rudream, etc), it is very likely that DMM wouldn't have been such a bit hit at the time...
If you really want to discuss "dodgy" behaviour of people, please explain to us why improvements in our GPL version find their way into dream's closed-source version, which is explicitly forbidden by the GPLv2 license...