The AROS Public License is an open license that includes no limitations with regard to target platforms. Either a piece of software is released under the APL license or it is not. If somebody adds provisions to the APL at will, the result will be a new license that may be partially compliant, but will certainly not be the same license.
In order words, the bounty description is contradictory.
No it's not, you're mixing up copyright and trademarks. GPSoft is promising two licenses: One for the code, which will be released under the APL, and one for using the trademark, which is only valid for 68k builds. You can still do with the code whatever you want (as long as you respect the APL), but if you're compiling it for anything but 68k you can't call it Opus Magellan.
Think of the official Firefox vs. OS4 Timberwolf vs. Debian Iceweasel.
