theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
theprestige, your questions are answered in the CCC statement I linked to and even in the part Floyt quoted. Don't really know why I should repeat it for you if it's there in plain sight, especially given your tone. Here's a SPIEGEL article from a few days ago which links to another article describing the rulings of the constitutional court which were violated. You can strike the qualifier, the claims are true. This is developing into quite the scandal.
The problem is, my questions are not answered in the part Floyt quoted. And as far as I can tell from the material provided, the rulings of the court were not violated.
Taking the second point first: The court ruled that the so-called "illegal" functions are in fact legal in some circumstances. Since the functions are in fact legal, it follows that it cannot be illegal to develop software that is able to perform those functions.
Taking the first point second: The software in question does not actually include the so-called "illegal" functions. Instead, it includes the ability to install arbitrary functions at a later time, including the so-called "illegal" functions.
As far as I can tell, the CCC's complaint is that there exists a piece of software, sometimes used by the German government (but not exclusive to the German government), that can load other programs including programs that must meet strict legal requirements for use; and that either the existence of this software, or its installation on a computer system, is illegal in some way (or at least is a very big problem of some kind for the German government).
What I'm trying to figure out is, in what way is the software in question illegal? Did the BusinessWeek article misinterpret the court's ruling somehow?