Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>
> [... GPL ...]
>
>> There is no contract
>
> Let the judges in Munich and Frankfurt know about that, dear GNUtian
> dak.
>
> http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_muenchen_gpl.pdf
> http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_frankfurt_gpl.pdf
>
> (in English)
>
> http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_munich_gpl.pdf
> http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_frankfurt_gpl.pdf
>
> Pg 11, my dear. "Die GPL ... offer ... acceptance ... § 151 BGB."
>
> Both panels erred regarding the relevance of assumed invalidity of the
> GPL 2b***, however.
>
> (From licensed German legal professional):

Uh, you cite a comment dissenting with a court decision as precedence?

That's not particularly impressive.  Not even for your standards.

How about reverting to citing some non-connected court cases and/or
adding LOL?  It still makes you look like an idiot without a clue, but
it is funnier.

-- 
David Kastrup