Let's have a look at some of the source code that is used in DIOS MIOS that crediar didn't write:
- A very large portion of MINI, taken from Bootmii (GPL licensed). Some of the SD code is BSD licensed (this code is actually absent from the SVN repo for some reason, meaning DML can't be built).
- The EHCI (USB2) driver, originally taken from linux (GPL) with modifications by kwiirk (also GPL).
- FatFS, the FAT filesystem code. More or less BSD licensed.
- vsprintf.c and string.c taken from Linux, supposedly written by Linus himself (GPL).
- cheat code handler from gecko OS (no idea what licence this uses but it's not crediar's creation).
- ipcmessage struct copy-pasted from neimod's custom ios toolkit (GPL).
- various bits and pieces from libogc: marcan's STACK_ALIGN macro, usbstorage.c (BSD).
A BSD license basically lets you do whatever you want with the code, but you don't own it - you therefore can't transfer ownership of it to someone else.
The GPL license says you can use it in your program for free, you can even charge money for that program - provided you also give away the full source code free of charge and don't add any restrictions to the code, such as disallowing military use or attempting to restrict how it is redistributed. Like BSD, the original author still retains ownership of the code that they wrote.
So first off, remember when the DML source code was "sold"? Yeah, that was completely illegal because the majority of the code didn't belong to crediar. Selling a compiled program that uses GPL code = ok, selling source code that doesn't belong to you = bad. I'm sure some people would argue about the technicalities, that he was only selling the code that he had originally written and the rest of the code was "just along for the ride" but let's face facts, without all the code contributed by other people it would be worthless without a hope of ever being compilable into something useful.
Fast forward to now: access to the project downloads is being restricted to one specific host and anybody who mirrors them gets served with a DMCA take-down notice (which includes a false statement made under penalty of perjury: that the complainant is the lawful copyright holder of the work). This is almost the exact opposite of what the GPL is intended to do: the program is not free (time has worth) and redistribution is restricted. If that is what crediar wants then he should make the effort to replace all the GPL code with his own original work, just as he should have done before he "sold" it. If he wants to piggy-back on other people's work instead, he should respect their wishes just as much as he expects people to respect his own.
Now if you want to discuss ethics, consider how ethical it is to use a puppet forum account to discredit other members and send out unlawful DMCA take-down notices just to make a few bucks off something which is mainly used for illegal activity and consists mostly of other people's work...