So, in legal context, this thread presented an interesting situation. I got in touch with a few old colleagues and they reviewed the goings-on here. They also took a chance to look at the subject matter(downloads). There has been some interesting discussion. Here are the conclusions(a few of which I do not agree with but yield to their judgment):
1. TPU is neither breaking the law nor violating, on any level, NVidia's rights. As such...
2. NVidia has no claim for wrong-going or damages against TPU.
3. The user(or users) who made the "report" to NVidia under the guise of contractual obligations desperately need to consult with an attorney as their understanding of the portion of the contract they've referenced is disturbingly flawed. Assuming their motivations were of good intentions and were not malicious, they did themselves nor NVidia ANY favors.(This underlined potion is what I disagree with as these actions outside of a legal procedural context can only be interpreted as malicious intent, but that's just my opinion.)
4. Referencing point "3", if TPU could prove damages as a result of the actions taken, the users who made the reports could and would be libel for the damages done. TPU would have full rights to take legal action to seek compensation for those damages.
5. Whatever reports that were made were not done with the assistance of legal counsel and through proper legal procedure, as would be required by law for contractual clause obligation actions.
6. Referencing point "5", when action of a nature such as that with has been discussed in this thread has been taken one DOES NOT discuss it in an open and public forum!
To those users who took it upon themselves to take "action" and make "reports" to NVidia about TPU, you desperately need to get in touch with an attorney and listen to them when they tell you to STFU. Your stated actions in this situation are legally libelous because you did not do them in the context of proper legal procedure. This is CLEARLY evident by the fact that you have both publically stated that you made the reports AND that you were doing so under the guise of contractual obligations. No licensed and practicing attorney would do any less than to instruct you to refrain from discussing the matter with anyone not directly involved in the situation and not under oath.