The Issue:A different hash can be considered a new copyright order. A very minor change to already recorded works of coders is also considered new copyright. This does not work. Law& coding doesn’t rhyme I will explain. The work should have been interpret but the court could not interpreted, read or verify ugly computer code. That’s logic because lawyers never become coders. If others go to the court disputing 2 almost similar things it is no issue and you win. The coder lost access to justice because the judge cannot code.
Solution 1 (Hard). Revise IP laws on an EU/global scale and also teach judges to understand the code.
Solution 2. (Easy&Free) Use your OWN natural blockchain language and a compiler to maintain IP/comply with laws.
First, understand that a language compiler is a central place where all code has to go through.
I emphasize the place can be controlled because it’s central and not decentralized like the blockchain. We also must know where the code is that we dispute....
BKS claims the blockchain language IP from Northchain B.V.
Northchain B.V. owners Herman Balsters, Ronald Pereboom, Jelko van der Wiel, Stefan de Ruiter & Gabe van der Weijde are held personally liable because they did not bring the case before the Dutch court before Feb 1st. 2019 after starting a PROVISIONARY (Dutch Kort Geding) legal case to substantiate their allegations. A criminal court declaration has been made as well as an disciplinary declaration against Ronald Pereboom for misleading valuations as accountant.
Pro-visionary cases have a temporarily limited reach. They do need to be followed up by law. In this case to proof any property right. Therefore Northchain B.V. and partners admitted her lost case they initiated June 2018.
Probably Northchain B.V. owners wanted to mislead investors and sell something that is not theirs. All who plan to do business with Northchain B.V. should be warned. Feel free to contact us.
The substance of the provisionary case was also...