Open source Free software 2624

David Kastrup

District court judges (like the GPL-moronized ones in Frankfurt, and, previously also in Munich) are "supervised" by appellate judges like Prof. Dr. Hoeren (OLG level, Copyright Senate, Appellate Judge) who was so annoyed by GPL-moronity exhibited by lower ranked fellows in the previous "German GPL" case in which the district court in Munich also bought exact same ifross' construction theory, that he provided feedback sua sponte, so to speak:

------ g. Finally, there is the important question of the consequences of the buttumed invalidity of the GPL. The Munich court argued that the question of the enforceability of the GPL was in no way relevant. According to the Bavarian judges, if the GPL is legally ineffective, the user does not have a license and is thus violating copyright law. On the face of it, that sounds plausible, but it is not. If somebody offers software on the Internet for downloading and links the download with invalid general terms, he can hardly sue for copyright infringement. Instead, the validity of the standard terms is a matter for the software distributor: if he wants to use invalid contractual terms, he bears the risk of their use. ------

The district court in Frankfurt was blinded and GPL-moronized by ifross' moronic "German GPL" construction theory just like the district court in Munich.

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

regards, alexander.