Great to see the US has its priorities straight. Spend money on war and other nonsense but don't spend it on your kids and society. What a joke.
One less cruise missile could keep 100 schools open all week for a whole year.
The title of this slashdot post, the refered article and many of the comments seem to be a little miss-informed.
Everyone is refering to evidence whereas no evidence is required or submitted when applying for an injunction (Einstweilige Verfügung) in Germany. To get a German injunction, the submitter simply has to make their claim believable to the judge. There is no need for any evidence... simply statements, references and photos that make the request for the injunction believable. To make matters worse, these injunctions are dealt with by Civil Courts meaning the judges have no idea about technology or design. The submitted believability statements (as they are called in German) are not tested for validity they are not properly scrutinized and they need no real foundation they simply have to be made believable.
The problem here is the German justice system more than anything else. Any justice system that can make such far reaching decisions based on belief is without a doubt not worth taking seriously.
Wouldn't it be nice to see companies actually competing instead of playing silly mafia games with lawyers and judges. A flawed system run by incompetent people simply trying to make some cash based on nonsens instead of doing something productive... Who needs them?
An injunction in Germany does not require any evidence! It simply needs to be made believable..
A German Injunction does not require any evidence... The case simply has to be made "believable"! In addition, the judge is a Civil judge who has no idea about technology or design. Therefore, making the case believable is not hard to do and the judge will often be satisfied with just a few screen shots or photos...
One thing I didn't mention in my first post...
From my experience, it is the Civil Court that grants an "Einstweilige Verfügung". This also seems to be the case here. This means judges that typically decide on things like divorce and other civil matters are making decisions about techno-legal matters. Needless to say, these judges are in no way qualified to make such decisions and are completely overwhelmed when confronted with technology. There is nothing just about the justice system, just a new framework for Mafia-like practices to be carried out under an official banner. What a joke....
The German "Einstweilige Verfügung" (injunction) is a bit of a joke. There is no need for any real proof to get a German injunction. Basically the judge just has to be convinced that the claim might be valid. It is almost impossible to get an "Einstweilige Verfügung" reversed.
The "Einstweilige Verfügung" is a disgrace and should be abolished. You just need one judge to be dumb enough to approve it (no real evidence required) and from that point on, there is nothing anyone can do about it until the case is settled in court. Needless to say anyone with good connections to judges can easily make a big mess of things...
To that end, what do you think a Lady Gaga CD will go for in (roughly) 2070, do you think? More importantly, how widely do you think her songs would be played by then? Would anyone still alive then even know or care who she was? That my friend is the big metric of success or failure concerning creative works.
You're assuming that a CD will go for anything in 2070. Current trends seem to suggest that the future price of music is 0$.
No, I'm New Here
Uh, I'm New Here
No, I'm New Here
No, I'm New Here
No, I'm New Here
No, I'm New Here
Happiness is twin floppies.
