On Wednesday 14 September 2005 17:22, David Nusinow wrote: --cut-- > Furthermore, the choice of venue clauses don't impose any sort of cost on > the freedoms we expect from software. They do impose a potential cost on > litigation related to that software,
Please describe what do you think the potential litigation costs comprise ? Do you believe that anti-linux or anti-gpl author of cddl software will never try to explore the choice-of-venue clause dragging the case to a non-veracious jurisdiction ? > but the DFSG shouldn't be used as a > weapon to change the legal system. It should be used to protect and > guarantee that we have certain freedoms in relation to using, modifying, > and distributing software. Choice of venue clauses don't change these > freedoms. There are real-world examples that choice-of-venue clauses could be more dangerous than without them. I'm not sure is DFSG can catch these challenges, but it certainly should not be read as glossary or as a bullet list with do's and dont's. -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
