As already mentioned, the awaited decision from the Supreme Court has far-reaching consequences, not only of a legal nature.

Is anyone allowed to do as Mr. Griess has done, and publish a website consisting largely of a collection of negative newspaper articles, which even laypeople understand is far from being a scientific or objective, let alone independent publication? He has taken certain quotes completely out of context in a manipulative way, with complete disrespect of copyright and thus also of ownership rights, in order to force a small group of honorable people into a corner, causing them to be considered a dangerous cult.

In numerous hearings in the Vienna Commercial Court the defendant has been obliged to commit to refraining from expressing his false claims about our religious community. We are a peaceful, dynamic, modern and professional group of loyal citizens who wish to live out Christianity in practice and that do not necessarily conform to a standard pattern.

Must we accept that our interests remain unprotected and that an individual, for personal feelings of revenge and by distortion and manipulative quotes, subjects honorable citizens to public persecution – possibly with legal sanction? Meanwhile, he conceals the fact that there is a wealth of objective, scientific literature about us.

Throughout 25 years, all public authorities and institutions have stopped Mr. Griess in his unilateral campaign or rejected his proceedings in courts of law. Thus they have provided the necessary protection for our small religious minority (approx. 150 people in Austria, of which 75 % are children or young people). An acquittal or sanction of Mr. Griess’s newfangled “right to quote” would be the same as legal assistance for his defamatory activity, which—as the courts themselves have found—is unprofessional in several areas and certainly not in accordance with the truth.

An astonishing ruling by the Vienna Higher Regional Court, with a predetermining nature and far-reaching consequences for authors, writers and academics, should also be documented here. A first instance ruling against Mr. Griess in the Korneuburg Regional Court due to breach of copyright was entirely repealed by the Vienna Higher Regional Court and, following an appeal by our attorney’s office, is now awaiting a decision by the Supreme Court..

Moreover, in its ruling, the Vienna Higher Regional Court expressly pointed out that there is as yet no Supreme Court decision in this case or in the nature of copyright infringement, and that the appeal is therefore expressly authorized.  We await the Supreme Court's verdict with interest.

Meanwhile, the verdict has been handed down, and on the one hand the Supreme Court has allowed our appeal in part, i.e. partially upheld the appeal and handed down a definitive   “ p a r t i a l   r u l i n g ”   against Mr. Griess, and on the other hand the appeal ruling was partially confirmed and partially completely overturned. The court “handed over the new decision to the Appeals Court after supplementary procedures.”