See, I know what I'm talking about when it comes to law, while you don't.  I've taken the LSAT and been in court many times, so I actually know how the law works.  Just putting something in your license terms doesn't make it legally binding; the terms have to be lawful.  I'm not the only one that can ignore the reverse engineering restrictions in your license; anyone in one of the many countries that allow fair use reverse engineering can.  If it wasn't legal to disassemble your miner code, then it would be very difficult to detect when you violate copyright law.  Since disassembling your code was important in proving you copied some of Marc Bevand's code, your response has been to point blame at those doing the disassembly.  The respectable thing to do would've been to admit you screwed up, and invite people to continue to dissassemble/reverse engineer your code to confirm that you are not illegally copying other people's code in the future.

When it comes to license restrictions regarding copying like the MIT license, it is valid and legally binding throughout most of the world.  There are only a few failed states that have no copyright law where MIT license would have no legal effect.

You're also showing how touchy/emotional you are.  There's nothing to your miner that I, Wolf, or most other developers don't already know.  You are almost paranoid about people learning how your code works, yet it's been over a month since I publicly described how to implement a ZEC miner that is significantly faster than yours.  Your eth miner isn't the fastest one either; I've seen convincing evidence that Wolf's private miner is at least 5% faster than yours on some targets like Hawaii and Pitcairn.

I'm probably wasting my keystrokes since you seem unable to be unable to have a calm and rational discussion.  People like Wolf earn people's respect not just from their coding abilities, but also because they don't take themselves too seriously.