> I could bring up how proprietary software companies go out of their way to insult the GPL by calling it "viral" but the breathtaking dishonesty of that argument alone makes my case for me.

I'm willing to say it -- the reason this narrative has so much purchase is that the FSF wants the GPL to be "viral" via its "interpretations" of its own license. If you don't want people to think you're part of the loony fringes, stop hanging out at the loony fringes.

As to whether the GPL actually is legally "viral", I have my doubts. I think the reason you actually don't see the FSF, SFLC, SFC in court is they think they've already lost at the fringes. The last several years of copyright law has been very, very hostile to any of the legal arguments they might make, say, re: dynamically linking modules. Credibility-wise they'd be wiped out. So, they keep soldiering on, pretending to man the battlements day after day.