Isn't the argument about SCO releasing a Linux distribution including the kernel under GPL a loose-loose situation for the GPL community?

I can see two outcomes:

• Either the argument is invalid which draws a boarder around the enforceability of GPL.
• Otherwise it forces evry commercial distributor of GPL'ed software to make a full code-review of the software to ensure that they don't distribute source the what to keep their rights to

The latter would make the acceptance of GPL as general purpose license even harder.

I think it comes down to "trust", and so far I haven't had a reason not to trust the CPR.

Considering that the Danish CPR is operated by a foreign company (according to some, usually untrustworthy sources, actually a NSA subsidiary) there are limits to my trust in the CPR. But as long as you are aware of which data are stored in the register and what it is possible (not necessarily legal) to do with it, you should be able to live with it.

And I don't know if I really trust the Faroese counterpart to CPR more, even though it is operated by a company, which is partially owned by the government.