gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: German-GPL victorious in Frankfurt district court


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: German-GPL victorious in Frankfurt district court
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:19:52 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> 
>> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
>> 
>> > http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_frankfurt_gpl.pdf
>> >
>> > Man oh man. This is fun.
>> >
>> > Hero Welte gets around 3K EURO and D-Link must tell him from whom and
>> > how many routers they've bought (I'm pretty sure that the stuff came
>> > from Taiwan) and subsequently resold. The rest of the case was
>> > dismissed.
>> 
>> Uh, Alexander?  Reality check.  The court decided to use a lower key
>
> Check it yourself, dak. The phrase "the rest of the case was
> dismissed" corresponds to "In √úbrigen wird die Klage abgewiesen."

Yup.  And the only "rest" was the key for the damages.

> which appears after impositions (impostion of award and imposition
> of obligation to provide information).

D-Link had to pay awards (calculated slightly differently) and had to
provide the requested information, and had to pay the whole legal and
court costs.  Really, according to your foaming at the mouth, one
would imagine they have won something.

> And regarding reality check, consider that prior to being sued by
> Welte, D-Link signed GPL compliance declaration (out of court), made
> the source code available, and even informed the customers.
>
> Welte sued D-Link nevertheless. Think of it. What's the message?

The message is that if you make people hunt down GPL violations
instead of admitting them upfront, you can't avoid paying the expenses
you incur for the copyright holder, both technical and legal.  It is
not like the GPL is singular in that manner: that is standard
practice.

> [...]
>> > The defendant raised the claim of illegal price-fixing and viral
>> > contracting in violation of EU Art 81. And the GPL-moronized judge
>> > concluded: fine, but it doesn't matter!
>> 
>> Yes, those kinds of thing happen outside of Terekhov-Lala-land.  
>
> You're being an idiot. Consequences for antitrust violation aside
> for a moment, Appellate Judge Hoeren (Copyright Senate):

Who was not involved with the case at hand and its details...

> The district court in Frankfurt was blinded and GPL-moronized by
> Welte's attorneys just like the district court in Munich.

Yes, you always say that when your legal fantasies do not make it in
the real world.

> So what? Just yet another proof that the GPL has amazing power to
> moronize people (including judges at district level).

It certainly has made you a most sad case.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]