Open Source developers do not expect remuneration for their efforts. This is implicit in the Open Source agreement. Then the only recourse available to them in the case of [alledged] Open Source License violation is for the public to actively and aggressively BOYCOTT the violator(s).
A.) Read the entire article
Throws copyrights from the train
By Kevin Fayle in San Francisco[. . .]
Analysis A dispute over some open source software used for model railroads resulted in an important decision last week, involving the scope of open source licenses and the remedies available when they are violated.
The decision has triggered alarm in the open source community, with a prominent open source licensing advocate charging that the court fell asleep at the switch in its legal analysis of the case.
Interpreting open source licenses as contracts removes the possibility of injunctive relief preventing license violators from further copying, modifying and/or distributing source code. Such a remedy is available for copyright violations, but not contract breaches.
For broken contracts, the remedy is damages - whatever it would take to put the plaintiff in the position he would have been in had the contract been fully performed. Since this is usually money, many providers of open source software would get the shaft, since they don't expect any remuneration for the copying of the software.
[. . .]
B.) If it is to work (without the support of the legal system) then it is up to us, the community of users, to insure that the integrity of Open Source is upheld.
C.) BOYCOTT Open Source violators.