Subject: RE: conducting a sane and efficient GPLv3, LGPLv3 Review
From: Walter van Holst <w.van.holst@mitopics.nl>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 00:08:38 +0200

 Fri, 3 Aug 2007 00:08:38 +0200
>> Frankly, I haven't seen any case where a GPL copyright owner has risked a
>> lawsuit to force the disclosure of a derivative work either, but that one
>> I'd be willing to take to court, perhaps even on contingency.

>Do you really think you'd find any judge willing to order that sort of
>specific performance as a equitable remedy, when lesser remedies
>involving injunctive relief and (if applicable) damages would more than
>suffice and are prescribed by statute?  You're the lawyer, my good sir,
>but I have my doubts.

Actually, the disclosure of derivative works is a performance required by the GPL for
those that distribute derivative works and therefore ordering such a disclosure would
strictly speaking be a lesser remedy than any injunctive relief or payment of damages.
The defendant in such a case already agreed to disclosure of derivative works by distributing
them and therefore it would not be disproportionate from a legal viewpoint to ask a
judge to order him or her to do so.

And now I'll try to say that again with a straight face :-)

Regards,

 Walter