What I find strange is how the license changes in the WURFL project have been carried out, regarding both the database and the code base. Unless the project has had a consistent policy of "no contributing without copyright assignment", any license changes would require that all contributors agree with the new license or the contributions of those who do not agree be removed from the relicensed work. I have seen no signs of such a massive undertaking rather than just an announcement of a license change with a lot of grumbling from contributors in response.
As for the present matter, the facts as presented now look very damning toward ScientiaMobile given that OpenDDR publicly asserts that their work is based on a version of the database which undisputedly allows them to make a derivative work. Also, Luca Passani's comments here and on Slashdot give the impression that he is dodging the fundamental problems presented regarding his argument and seems more concerned about the competition OpenDDR poses instead of any legitimate copyright related issues. However, I do recognize that his counsel may have advised him to not speak too much and leave the best arguments for the court room.