GPL is Broken

Invent your own language. Import GPL code into it. Publish resulting source code, but avoid publishing the compiler or language specification.

Now technically code is open source, but nobody, beside you, can ready it or compile it.

I think GPL is an instance of halting problem and Stallman is a retard.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html#section3

The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.

Here's the relevant section, if we're all going to play language lawyer actual lawyer.

It's acceptable to use portable GPL C code in a program that depends on proprietary Win32 API calls.

It's acceptable to work on the project in FakeLang 0.9, but if you can write it somebody else can read it and translate it back to C.