Re: The legality of wodim
On Saturday 10 November 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Oliver Vivell <oliver@vivell.info> wrote:
> > Please stop spreading your superficial knowledge about legal things.
> > You've proven, that you are far away to have the legal expertise to
> > judge whether all other opinions beside yours are wrong.
>
> It is bad to see that nobody who recently answered to this thread seems to
> have the needed legal knowledge and nobody even tries to ask a lawyer for
> help.
I really hope that the teasing statements like that one (some of which are
also truly untruthful) will finally piss somebody off and you will finally
face the whole austerity of the german legal system, which I trully believe
in. The sad thing is that nobody takes you seriously anymore, except the
psychologists (not so interesting as a development).
> Please do not continue to spread laymens guesses.
>
> > To think that only your opinion is the only correct one in the world is
> > ridiculous. You might have your opinion (even if it's absolutely
> > minority), but others too.
>
> In the eyes of uninformed people, the reality may look ridiculous.
> Try to get help from a lawyer.....
>
> > I'm fed up reading that everybody except you is competent enough to
> > understand the GPL. That's not the right way to convince somebody.
>
> If you are so certain that your ideas are corect, why don't you prove your
> claims by quotes from the original GPL text?
>
> > And if you use terms, please translate them into english, that everybody
> > understands them, so don't use "Urheberrecht" but the english term
> > "Intellectual property rights".
>
> You are really funny.
>
> The "official" translation for "Urheberrecht" is "Copyright", but this is
> not a correct translation. The best way to deal with this problem is to use
> the non-abiguous original word "Urheberrecht".
>
> If you like to read the legal base for my software, you need to read the
> German original (e.g. here: http://bundesrecht.juris.de/urhg/index.html)
> anyway.
>
> "Intellectual property rights" is even a wrong translation as this term
> from my understanding only applies to the parts of the "Urheberrecht" that
> are missing in the US Copyright law.
See... that's why you are running out of "original" users and bug-reporters.
You managed to pissed off quite some users via different mailing lists: let's
see, one or two OpenBSDish, several Linuxish, and who is next: opensolaris
ones ?
--
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB
Reply to: