Slashdot Mirror
Preliminary Injunction Against SuSE
Random Walk writes "The German news site Heise Online reports that on behalf of an anonymous client,
a lawyer has won a
preliminary injunction (German only)
against the Linux distributor SuSE.
The injunction forbids the delivery of SuSE CDs as long as they contain some program name that apparently violates a registered
trademark. No more details available, but SuSE seems to be in negotiations with the other party." Head over to the fish for translation.
Remember the Adobe vs Killustrator case? That was in Germany too. Someone said that it's common practice for legal firms to act 'freelance' and track down supposed violations without the prior approval of the trademark holder. Perhaps this is the same firm even.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I don't know how many of you are aware of this, but this Gravenreuth guy, the attorney, is one of the most hated men in the German IT scene. He has been going to court over cases like these for at least ten years.
I once got a letter from him: Back in the old Amiga days, i posted a classified ad somewhere, since i wanted to sell some of my old hardware. A couple of days later, I got a letter from some girl (including picture), who listed some of her games and wanted to trade.
Back then, I heard of these Gravenreuth tactics, so I just threw it away. Even writing some witty response on the illegality of the proposal would have probably invited some action from the law firm.
Rumours go it is still kIllustrator, which is no called "Krayon", and some sucker has a trademark called "Crayon" and runs a website crayon.de.
It's not easy, being green. -- Kermit the Frog
Entrapment is a criminal doctrine, not civil. It applies to the police going too far--convincing someone to commit a crime they otherwise would not (simply asking or offering the crime isn't enough.). THink of Delorean (sp?). The goverment harassed a man with a failing business with repeated opportunities to commit a lucrative time, after repeatedly being told no. They *created* the criminal. This is a far cry from a one time offer.
WHile this doesn't apply, the doctrine of "estoppel" could potentially apply. In a nutshell, this doctrine says, "even though you may be legally correct, your own conduct makes it inequitable for you to be able to make that argument, so you can't."
It would probably be a close call as described above.
hawk, common law lawyer
these German "Abmahnungen" seem like a really bad idea as they can be abused by scum like this lawyer.
an idea that can be exploited is not necessarily a bad idea. Think of an idea just as a tool. Just because you can hurt someone with a hammer, a hammer is not a bad thing by design.
Why do they still exist?
-alAn "Abmahnung" is intended to prevent a lawsuit. The idea behind it is, that company A shall be able to have a means against unfair competition done by company B without having to go to court and have a year-lasting lawsuit. At least that is what the means of "Abmahung" was developed for.
The problem is, that german jurisdiction tends towards the attitude that any online activity can be interpreted as "taking part in brand competition" and therefore "Abmahnung" gets applied to virtually everyone in the same way, be he a hobbyist, an university, an OS-programmer or a company.