<story><title>Our lawsuit against ChessBase</title><url>https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2021/our-lawsuit-against-chessbase/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>elmo2you</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m definitely not a lawyer&amp;#x2F;expert on this, even less about Germany specifically, but isn&amp;#x27;t actual financial damage required for financial compensation? While Stockfish might have suffered damage from ChessBase&amp;#x27;s behavior, if it can&amp;#x27;t be clearly specified as monetary damage, I don&amp;#x27;t really see how they could make money from this.&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, if ChessBase is found (and ruled) to have distributed software illegally, the company and its executives might have another problem. I don&amp;#x27;t know the specifics of German law, but I believe that distributing software (or any product) illegally is actually a criminal offense (no longer a civil dispute). That could (theoretically&amp;#x2F;eventually) lead to criminal prosecution and who knows .. jail time?</text></item><item><author>wiz21c</author><text>Stockfish has an opportunity to make money here. No?</text></item><item><author>dsiegel2275</author><text>I agree.  Likely a quick checkmate in court.</text></item><item><author>apetresc</author><text>If this goes to trial, I think this might be the cleanest and most straightforward test of the GPL in court we&amp;#x27;ve had up to this point?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>gpm</author><text>Not a lawyer, but I think there&amp;#x27;s a weak argument for actual financial damages here.&lt;p&gt;There was only one legal way for ChessBase to do what it did (rebrand stockfish without attribution), and that was to acquire a (non-gpl) license from all the stockfish developers. That was almost certainly possible, for enough money. Stockfish developers could arguably sue for those lost licensing fees.</text></comment>
<story><title>Our lawsuit against ChessBase</title><url>https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2021/our-lawsuit-against-chessbase/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>elmo2you</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m definitely not a lawyer&amp;#x2F;expert on this, even less about Germany specifically, but isn&amp;#x27;t actual financial damage required for financial compensation? While Stockfish might have suffered damage from ChessBase&amp;#x27;s behavior, if it can&amp;#x27;t be clearly specified as monetary damage, I don&amp;#x27;t really see how they could make money from this.&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, if ChessBase is found (and ruled) to have distributed software illegally, the company and its executives might have another problem. I don&amp;#x27;t know the specifics of German law, but I believe that distributing software (or any product) illegally is actually a criminal offense (no longer a civil dispute). That could (theoretically&amp;#x2F;eventually) lead to criminal prosecution and who knows .. jail time?</text></item><item><author>wiz21c</author><text>Stockfish has an opportunity to make money here. No?</text></item><item><author>dsiegel2275</author><text>I agree.  Likely a quick checkmate in court.</text></item><item><author>apetresc</author><text>If this goes to trial, I think this might be the cleanest and most straightforward test of the GPL in court we&amp;#x27;ve had up to this point?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pabs3</author><text>I would suggest that they could ask for an injunction as well as restitutionary&amp;#x2F;disgorgement damages (give back their ill-gotten gains) and possibly punitive damages (to discourage others from violating the GPL).&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Damages#Punitive_damages_(non-compensatory)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Damages#Punitive_damages_(non-...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>