> Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients’ exercise of the rights granted herein.

This is the issue: You HAVE to put Fairplay on the programs (aka, drm, aka, Further Restrictions).

It is not Apple's licensing agreement, but instead the uniform Fairplay system on the device.

This is the same issue on Nintendo, Sony, and Xbox (although some platforms have source provided libraries which likely would have to be GPLed as well, and you can't under NDAs, the uniform DRM makes GPL2 incompatable with those platforms).

GPL3 has changed this area, which I take to be admission of the flaw there. Then again, GPL 3 added a ton of stuff people disliked as well, so it's adoption is less than full.

You can meander back and forth that many licenses are restrictive or not, but the GPL is designed to force certain actions from users of the code. That's fine that they release their code that way, but the fact they're trying to do more then get attribution and not get sued with the license, or even get fixes back for their own parts of the code, means people should be warned about this.