Re: your mail
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:16:12AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 10:31:02PM -0800, D. Starner wrote:
> > > Also, in any sane legal
> > > system, it should only affect those users who willingly violate the licence,
> > > even after a cease-and-desist letter, and i would say they deserve what they
> > > get.
> >
> > In any sane legal system, the judge is going to find out what's going
> > on from both sides before he even considers dismissing the case. That
>
> Ok, but we are in the case where the defendor is innocent, right ?
So? The cost of defending against the suit is still considerable. And
there is no guarantee of being awarded costs even for a frivolous lawsuit,
let alone collecting.
> > means that the user has to hire a French lawyer to write a response to
> > the statement of cause. Unless the judges are omniscient, that's what
> > has to happen.
>
> What exactly is stopping him from hiring a local lawyer to write the statement
> and sent it per letter to the judge, and how will it differ from the case
> where the court of venue is local to him ? The choice of law is the french law
> in both case.
It's still very costly. Here's an example from the US:
http://mainsleazespam.com/law/ema.html
Whilst this is America, home of the bullshit lawsuit, I contend that
something substantively similar could happen basically anywhere. It
happened in Australia, too, again around the issue of spam, and I think
there's been a similar case or two in Europe somewhere.
> > And let's be honest; a court case may look obvious to us, but few
> > judges have ever had a case where an open-sourceish license is
>
> Well, but a tentative to repeteadly harass using lawsuits will probably not be
> missed by a judge.
s/tentative/tendency/? Possibly not, but it's not hard to identify this
sort of thing if the suits don't come before the same judge.
- Matt
Reply to: