Well, the thing is unless someone bothers to bring a legal challenge against NeoPwnv2 as a violation of the GPL, I don't see the questions being answered. I think he's made himself a lot of room to maneuver. The release is "postponed indefinitely", which can still be re-explained as "there's unresolved problems", no one bought anything, like you said (though him using "beta proceeds" in saying that the donation total doesn't reflect beta proceeds, combined with him having a "store" and a set donate amount to get access to the beta, frankly, is pretty damn similar in function to "buying" that a good enough lawyer in a reasonable enough court should be able to easily win that argument). But my concern with these legal issues getting answered is that the only angle of attack is arguing that no matter what you call it, it was basically a "purchase" of access to the beta. And unless someone's willing to take that to court, gets a lawyer who feels they can win from that angle, and finds a court that will take the case on those grounds, it's a bit iffy as to whether or not the legal questions regarding licensing/legality will ever get answered.