Re: Problematic distribution of P2P clients in France
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:10:37AM +0000, MJ Ray <email@example.com> wrote:
> Mike Hommey <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 03:22:56PM +0000, MJ Ray <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > Simon Vallet <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > > > 1=B0 To willingly edit, distribute to the public, or inform the public
> > > > about, in any form, a device whose obvious purpose is to permit
> > > > unauthorized distribution of protected works
> > > Can someone tell me what 'obvious purpose' means here? [...]
> > The text is probably fuzzy on purpose. Until it is ruled by a court, it
> > will remain fuzzy.
> I thought French law was a code and did not rely so much on case
> rulings by courts. Have I misunderstood?
Court ruling is done according to the law, but when the law is fuzzy,
the court will rule by interpreting the law the way it thinks it should.
For next ruling, the court would base its interpretation on previous
interpretations by other courts, ie jurisprudence.