Alexander Terekhov <[email protected]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > > [... GPL ...] > >> There is no contract > > Let the judges in Munich and Frankfurt know about that, dear GNUtian > dak. > > http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_muenchen_gpl.pdf > http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_frankfurt_gpl.pdf > > (in English) > > http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_munich_gpl.pdf > http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_frankfurt_gpl.pdf > > Pg 11, my dear. "Die GPL ... offer ... acceptance ... § 151 BGB." > > Both panels erred regarding the relevance of assumed invalidity of the > GPL 2b***, however. > > (From licensed German legal professional):
Uh, you cite a comment dissenting with a court decision as precedence? That's not particularly impressive. Not even for your standards. How about reverting to citing some non-connected court cases and/or adding LOL? It still makes you look like an idiot without a clue, but it is funnier. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
