How do you normally sue over a patent violation? Some estimation of damages in comparison to a hypothetical world where the patent wasn’t violated, then multiplied by some number so that it’s not worthwhile to violate patents constantly given that the court can’t prosecute every case?
It would seem as if the good-faith clause is basically asserting there aren’t damages in comparison to a world where the patent isn’t violated (or that usage is actually positive so long as it’s not used by someone who is collecting rent on their own patents.)
Once they had done so, it would be a standard patent infringement lawsuit between Tesla and Toyota.
This could be one path where you could enforce good-faith, IMHO IANAL.
If I cam granting use of my patent to you, I could request you put on a red fedora every day -- and if you fail to do so, then I will revoke you right to use the patent. You have to chose, put on that fedora, or don't use my patent. I guess you could chose to use the patent and be sued...
In any case, I am sure a document worded just right would either prevent that patent being used by a company who does not want to comply, or a lawsuit for violating the patent.
It could be simply put -- if you use this patent you may do so given the following. 1) You grant others the right to use your patents free of charge. 2) You don't sell your patents to any 3rd party.
I am sure there is some other things that might need to be covered.
Independently invent something. Turns out it's already patented, within this good faith consortium. Now the only way to use it is by participating. Normally, this kind of thing results in getting sued for royalties.
You have answered it. Free patent, GPL or not, you'd have this problem. And it's even worse on "normal" cases.
I've contributed quite a few patches to open source projects, and sometimes if I'll review other patches I cannot tell the difference between code I've written or that others had written.