Comment Important, but not for restricting free speech! (Score 1) 349
This is not about restricting free speech.
SCO came out and said that all Linux users are infringing their copyrights.
Univention then went to court and told them, that SCO is harming their business with false claims and they should not be allowed to do that. In Germany such claims violate competition laws, if they are false.
There was a hearing and the court granted an preliminary injunction that barred SCO from telling their story, because SCO did not show any proof to their claims. At the hearing they only needed to show just the possibility to get that injuction dismissed, but they didn't.
The premliminary injuction is only there, to stop any harm that could be done until this is resolved by a real court.
So now there should be a real court trial, where the issue would be resolved.
But SCO didn't want this to go to court, so they negotiated with Univention and got an Out-of-court settlement.
There are two important things to learn from this story:
1. In Germany a business is not allowed to make false statements about their competition until they can proof it. There are special laws to promote fair competition in the marketplace and making false claims to harm a competitors business vialates them.
2. FAR MORE IMPORTANT
To avoid having to proof their claims in court they signed a settlement which basically looks like the worst court decision they could have gotten.
Please note that usually these settlements remain confidential. That Univention is allowed to show this basically demonstrates, that SCO kneeled down and kissed Univentions butt to avoid going to court.
Univention got the settlement exactly how the wanted it.
What does this say about SCOs claims?
Regards
Klaus
SCO came out and said that all Linux users are infringing their copyrights.
Univention then went to court and told them, that SCO is harming their business with false claims and they should not be allowed to do that. In Germany such claims violate competition laws, if they are false.
There was a hearing and the court granted an preliminary injunction that barred SCO from telling their story, because SCO did not show any proof to their claims. At the hearing they only needed to show just the possibility to get that injuction dismissed, but they didn't.
The premliminary injuction is only there, to stop any harm that could be done until this is resolved by a real court.
So now there should be a real court trial, where the issue would be resolved.
But SCO didn't want this to go to court, so they negotiated with Univention and got an Out-of-court settlement.
There are two important things to learn from this story:
1. In Germany a business is not allowed to make false statements about their competition until they can proof it. There are special laws to promote fair competition in the marketplace and making false claims to harm a competitors business vialates them.
2. FAR MORE IMPORTANT
To avoid having to proof their claims in court they signed a settlement which basically looks like the worst court decision they could have gotten.
Please note that usually these settlements remain confidential. That Univention is allowed to show this basically demonstrates, that SCO kneeled down and kissed Univentions butt to avoid going to court.
Univention got the settlement exactly how the wanted it.
What does this say about SCOs claims?
Regards
Klaus
