|Wesley R. Elsberry
Joined: May 2002
|Quote (Bob O'H @ Aug. 26 2013,09:48)|
|Quote (sparc @ Aug. 20 2013,23:11)|
|In his earlier EN&V piece on Biological Information: New Perspectives Casey complained about legal issues: |
|At this point, many might wonder why the authors didn't sue. They almost did. But there was a major unjust barrier to a lawsuit: Springer-Verlag is based in Germany, and a boilerplate clause in the contract said that in the case of a dispute, "The courts of Berlin, Germany shall have the exclusive jurisdiction." This meant that the authors, who are academics of limited financial means, found that it would have been financially unfeasible and extremely difficult to pursue a potentially long, costly, and drawn-out lawsuit in Germany. Justice isn't cheap, or easily obtained, and unfortunately the authors simply couldn't afford going to Germany to get it.|
IANAL but IMO all above is lame excuses:
Why is it unjust if a German publisher choses his Germany as the place of jurisdiction? In addition, one of the authors, Werner Gitt, is a German citizen who lives in Braunschweig, Germany. He doesn't have to go to Germny because he is already there. And law suit costs are usually much lower in Germany than in the US. One might add that it appears unlikely that any of the authors would be left alone financially if the case would have gone to a US court.
Come on Casey. You didn't have a chance but you still have to sell the story to your audience. BTW, you may not have realized yet that Germany has free speech laws and special laws to prevent censorship. Thus, you or Gitt could try to sue Springer in Germany or bring your case to the EU court of human rights. Good luck with that.
I noticed that. It's a pity Dembski et al. didn't notice it before they signed the contract.
Or even get competent legal counsel to look it over before signing.
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker