Re: Poor GPL-Enforcers

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hey ams, BusyBox aside for a moment, Welte has a plan!

http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/186944/0ccd89b5598e797f/

-----
What is most interesting about having some organization backing this 
project, is that we can actually do "more interesting" legal action 
than I can do now. So far, we've only enforced very clear cases, from 
a legal point of view. Until now, gpl-violations.org has not helped 
to produce any legal precedents on important questions such as 
derivative works or binary-only kernel modules. However, after funding 
the organization later this year, and thus the legal risk landing on 
that organization rather than me personally, I could very much imagine 
that we would look into getting some court decisions on that area, too. 
So stay tuned, there is probably an exciting time ahead in the next 
couple of years ;)
-----

Dear GNUtians amd and dak, hurry up and help the hero Welte do "more 
interesting" legal actions. It'll finally put an end to your bluffing 
and invalidate the whole scheme once and for all... in effect, putting 
the entire GPL'd code base into quasi public domain (unenforceability 
due to unlawful contract terms -- copyright misuse and all that).

Hey dak, don't you know that Welte has established the *contract* 
status of GPL in the German court? (Albeit not in an ordinary lawsuit, 
but in a ex parte preliminary proceedings ("Einstweilige Verfuegung")
which doesn't really establish anything, and which, almost entirely,
except the contract status, was totally shredded by criticism from 
more authoritative folk than exhausted Munich District Court I (the 
Court has simply stamped Welte's attorneys filling containing their
theory (the gang at ifross) about the GPL being a rather curious AGB 
based beast coupled with purely German concept of contractual 
"condition subsequent" without giving much thought to it) like 
Appellate Judge Hoeren.)

regards,
alexander.