[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Feb 2009 23:26:12 +0100 |
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):
-----
Das Urteil sollte mit der Berufung angegriffen werden.
Das Gericht hat rechtsfehlerhafter Weise die
Prüfung eines Verstoßes von Art.81 EGV u. §1 GWB
unterlassen.
Das Urteil ist diesbezüglich *offensichtlich* falsch, denn
einerseits wird die GPL als AGB bezeichnet, andererseits
aber wie ein Individualrechtsgeschäft (read: Individualvertrag)
behandelt, um den §139 BGB anwenden zu können. So geht es nicht!
§139 ist nicht auf AGB anwendbar.
Wenn Klauseln in AGB unwirksam sind, so gilt
nicht §139 BGB sondern §306 BGB. Danach ist
nicht, wie das Gericht irrtümlich meint, der
gesamte Lizenzvertrag nichtig, sondern der
Vertrag bleibt wirksam und nur die
nichtige Klausel wird durch gesetzliche
Vorschriften ersetzt.
Das Urteil könnte in der Berufung durchaus anders
ausfallen. Die vielen Schreibfehler im Urteil
sind ebenfalls bemerkenswert.
-----
GNUtian dak (perhaps with help of GNUtian acm [Alan Mackenzie
<acm@muc.de>]) might want to translate the comment above for the sake of
possible benefit to others...
What say you now, GNUtian dak?
***) Noted also by Prof. Hoeren:
http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/feedback/OIIFB_GPL2_20040903.pdf
>From Hoeren's profile:
-----
EXPERIENCE IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Judge at the Court of Appeal in Düsseldorf within the Trademark &
Copyright Senate;
Professor in Intellectual Property Law at the University of Muenster;
Member, Task Force Group on Intellectual Property Law, European
Commission/DG XIII.
-----
regards,
alexander.
--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, (continued)
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/24
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Hyman Rosen, 2009/02/24
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/24
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rahul Dhesi, 2009/02/24
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rahul Dhesi, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rahul Dhesi, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, David Kastrup, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, David Kastrup, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, David Kastrup, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Rjack, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Hyman Rosen, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Peter Köhlmann, 2009/02/25
- Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/02/25