Do you, by chance, mean "misuse of commercial utilization", that is, practices such as:
- Sub-licensing/re-licenisng under non-free software licenses.
- Sub-licensing/re-licenisng the same copylefted work under non-free software licenses, or under a non-copyleft license.
- "Extorting" the licensee, either directly (through contact), or indirectly (by releasing a crippleware/limited free/libre version of the software).
- Taking a free/libre software, making adaptations, and license this adaptation as non-free (or breaking the license terms somehow), *regardless* of being under a copyleft license. Common in mobile devices, and also in automobiles.
- Taking some free/libre software and making it available in a way such that there is a digital handcuff preventing the end-user from exercising the essential freedoms of the software. Common in mobile devices.
- Overpriced redistribution of *source files*, such that the end-user/licensee gives up on requestiong such source files. As far as I know, version 3 of the GPL is one of the few licenses that have terms that try to prevent this, or that have terms with which the licensee can resort to and demand (either normally, or through the judiciary).
- Not providing an offer letter/document for the complete corresponding source files in the cases covered by the GPL (I known these exist in the version 3 of the GPL).
Least but not least, I can also include:
- When the licensor, provided he *knows* the people involved, overlooks/ignores cases where the licensees are violating the licenses (either because the licensor received compensation, or simply because he wants "broad" adoption).