Subject: AW: For Approval: Some License Or Another
From: "Axel Metzger" <metzger@mpipriv-hh.mpg.de>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:52:46 +0100

 Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:52:46 +0100

Hello Lawrence, hello list,

>I didn't mind your clear words, and I hope you won't mind mine....

;-)).

>Many people disagree with you that the GPL or other open source licenses
>have problems under German law. 

You should have a look into the law review articles published in Germany and
France during the last 2-3 years. Then you would know better than your Finish
anonymous correspondent. Here is a list (including links to your
contributions...;-)): http://www.ifross.de/ifross html/links.html#Recht

The Finnish anonymous is right in saying that my co-author Till Jaeger was
the one to enforce section 2, 3 and 4 before the Munich District Court. This
should give you a feeling of trust in our competence and our goals. However,
the case was an easy one because the licensee was a businessman, there was
only one rightholder etc. I am sure you read the decision and now about the
particularities of the case. 

The Munich decision was important because MS and others try to lobby against
Open Source by emphasizing the legal problems of the licenses under German
and European law. However, FSF and others should try the solve the legal
problems that are really there. 

>You applaud Creative Commons for
>building a coalition with Europeans, and I agree that's a good thing. But
>you are doing the opposite: Setting off in a new direction because you've
>not been able to build a coalition with any existing license author.

I know others would advice to wait for another ten years.

Best regards,

Axel