Each library that you use as a dependency should have a LICENSE file in their source code. I would just take these licenses and rename them to "LIBRARY_NAME_LICENSE" and include it with the source code.
I know licenses (like the BSD license) require that the original license be included when any source code is reused.
If you are just using these as linked libraries, I don't believe any of this is needed. But I may be wrong about this one.
Since you're making a derivative work of GPL-licensed software, your combined work would need to be licensed under the GPL as a whole. However, if you don't want to distribute your work, you are in no way compelled to shared your changes.
The GPL FAQ has this to say on keeping your modifications private:
Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public?
The GPL does not require you to release your modified version, or any part of it. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them...
But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL.
Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you.
Thus, you are not required to make your modified program public, but you if you do, you must share it under the GPL.
Perhaps you're also worried that sharing your output calendars will compel you to share your modified code. The FAQ explains that output data produced by a GPL-licensed work is not covered by the GPL, unless the output actually contains GPL-licensed material (e.g., if part of the GPL-licensed program itself is included in the program's output):
Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware designs, can I require that these designs must be free?
In general this is legally impossible; copyright law does not give you any say in the use of the output people make from their data using your program. If the user uses your program to enter or convert his own data, the copyright on the output belongs to him, not you. More generally, when a program translates its input into some other form, the copyright status of the output inherits that of the input it was generated from.
So the only way you have a say in the use of the output is if substantial parts of the output are copied (more or less) from text in your program. For instance, part of the output of Bison (see above) would be covered by the GNU GPL, if we had not made an exception in this specific case.
In what cases is the output of a GPL program covered by the GPL too?
Only when the program copies part of itself into the output.
So, your output is probably not GPL-licensed. Note that even in some unusual case where the output is somehow GPL-licensed (like a Bison grammar), the output is a separate work from the program that created it. You'd need to obey GPL restrictions on the output, but sharing GPL-licensed output does not mean you must share changes on the GPL-licnesed program that created that output. The GPL on the program only comes into effect when the program itself is distributed, not when its output is distributed.
Best Answer
The first two actions are completely fine. That’s all allowed by the GPL. If you want to restrict it, your only option might be to trademark the name; still, anyone is free to publish the app under a different name.
Regarding the third point, do you mean that the modified app isn’t published at all, but only used privately? That would be fine as well. Or do you mean that the modified app is distributed without any source code, or with source code under a different license? That would be a violation of the GPL, and you could take legal actions to try and stop it.
Generally, you can’t restrict the GPL to only some people. Everyone is free to use, modify or distribute a GPLed program, as long as they abide by the terms of the license.