Pretending someone else created something is a shitty thing to do anyway. Also the defacement thing is a rather special case. If you'd buy a painting and defac

Pretending someone else created something is a shitty thing to do anyway. Also the defacement thing is a rather special case. If you'd buy a painting and defaced or burned it, no one would care. I also don't see how it could possibly apply to software or music. It's certainly an interesting case and kind of weird but apart from that not all that important. In practice you can sign away pretty much all of your rights and none of those that you can't sign over really matter when it comes to software. It's not like the GPL is some questionable license either. It's a well established licence and has been tested in German court. Based on the information from this court case it also doesn't appear as if that's in anyway in doubt. The focus is entirely on where the lines should be drawn in this particular case.