Why doesn't VIZIO just comply?

My understanding was what the judge ruled out was not reinstallation per se, but rather that reinstallation must result in a working TV.

The more likely reason for vizio not providing the source is far simpler - if the SFC can get a complete set of source code, as defined by the GPL, they know that someone will eventually figure out how to make a working reinstall.

And since it is likely that vizio, as with many TV companies, particularly ones that don't compete on quality, see advertising as the next thing to "unlock growth", having users able to turn their smart TV into a dumb one, or worse, a smart one sans advertising, the ability to reinstall represents an strategic business threat.

Unfortunately, in the US judicial system, the true matter being debated can only be determined by the big hole that no one is talking about.

The GPL was written to, fundamentally, ensure end users retained control of their hardware. Unfortunately, in this scenario, this runs smack up against the business model most TV companies are pursuing nowadays: advertising.