Well both ideas are speculation on our part, but I think the kid not telling the news the whole story is still more likely than 14 people failed to take their responsibilities seriously because they are overworked. Would you vote to expel someone based on the kind of evidence you are imagining?
If you are right, I find it very sad that these individuals were given the power of expulsion and did not treat that power with respect.
Also I don't see how it is in the company's interest to have him expelled when they already had an NDA. In order to fault the company and the college, we have to presume too many facts. Now they are overworked, coerced, irresponsible, etc etc. Occam's Razor does not like this theory :)
From NicBenjamin's cbc link
Dawson College spokeswoman Donna Varrica sent CBC a statement saying the college stands by its original decision to expel Al-Khabaz.
Varrica clarified the process that leads to expulsion. She said the process includes a step in which a student is issued an advisory to cease and desist the activities for which he or she is being sanctioned.
"When this directive is contravened by the student by engaging in additional activities of the same sort, the College has no recourse but to take appropriate measures to sanction the student," Varrica stated.
Apparently the school told him not to do this and he persisted? Also they stand by the decision and the software company offered him a scholarship and part time job now that the new broke.
So what's really going on here? I know everyone wants to root for the underdog, but perhaps the kid is just not telling the whole truth.