On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 13:00:26 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <oagfu3-sb9.ln1@xxxxxxxxxx>, rgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Roy Culley)
> wrote:
>> Now what does 'the validity of the GPL under German law' mean to you
>> Erik?
>
> Eric has the peculiar notion that what a court says is a better
> indication of that the court said than what someone who is not a court
> and not a lawyer says the court said.
I'll be the first to admit that english translations of the entire ruling
are not yet avialable, so there might be something there that "upholds" the
GPL, but so fare the published comments do not. They simply indicate that
the GPL's validity is irrelevant to the case, as has been the case with
every other so-called "ruling that upholds the GPL" in any court i've ever
seen. There has always been some other mitigating factor that makes ruling
on the GPL irrelevant.
|
|
