Goldman Sachs built an internal-use-only tool that relied on some GPL code. Aleynikov is going to claim that this made Goldman Sach's code fall under the GPL, and therefore he has a right to redistribute it.
I hope that's not what's going on, because the pointy-haired ones don't need another reason to be afraid of FOSS.
if (you publish binary of DW) then {you have to provide sources of DW under GPL}
Simply it does not apply to in-house (non-published) work. You are fine to keep it closed-source.
This article is more coherent.
http://www.fiercecomplianceit.com/story/aleynikov-trial-and-...
It seems like he's essentially grasping at straws after the fact to defend himself. But as has been said, that's not how open source works. I don't think this is actually going to make anyone nervous since clearly no one bought his story. You can lie and not be believed about proprietary licenses too.
... I feel sad actually sympathizes with the prosecution here but that's how it goes.