Scripsit John Hasler
> Henning Makholm writes:
> > I doubt that "people who do not wish to become legally bound to appear at
> > the the author's home court whenever he files a frivolous lawsuit" can be
> > meaningfully described as a "group of persons" that can be discriminated
> > against.
> Why do you think that a copyright owner needs a choice of venue clause in
> order to file suit against you in his home jurisdiction?
If he does so, his home court will first need to determine whether it
considers itself to have jurisdiction over me for the purpose of the
suit. It will make this determination based on its local law. In the
*usual* case, the local law will specify that the court has
jurisdiction over me only if I live (or maintain a business precence)
within its geographical jurisdiction *or* if the case concerns
something that happened within the geographical jurisdiction *or* if I
have previously agreed to submit to a nonstandard jurisdiction.
Moreover, if the license says that I need to consent to a foreign
court's jurisdiction over the case, there is a good chance that *my*
home court will accept this consent at face value, and allow the
foreign court's decision to be enforced in my country *without*
allowing the material facts of the case to be retried at home.
There is, of course, always the risk that the author's home court is
crazy and thinks it has worldwide jurisdiction. Licenses cannot change
that, but they should not require me to explicitly *broaden* my
exposure to nuisance lawsuits.
--
Henning Makholm Blessed are those with no
shoes, for the earth shall kiss them.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
