This is a choice of venue and is considered non-free by many
debian-legal contributors (including me...).
In a nutshell, this choice of venue discriminates against people who
live far away from Santa Clara County, California, USA and thus fail
DFSG#5. Those people can be forced to travel around the planet in order
to defend themselves in a dispute raised by the copyright holder.
I am not at all convinced. First, I wonder if this choice of venue is
legal. You must be aware of the fact that any condemnation of US
tribunal cannot have any effect outside of the U.S.; so if this person
leave far away from the U.S, he can simply ignore any decision of an
U.S. tribunal as long as he does not comes to the U.S. If someone is
sued it is always very inconvenient for him whether he lives on the U.S.
or not. In some case this choice of venue if even more avantageous for
someone not living in the U.S. since only a U.S tribunal can sue him and
the decision of this tribunal has no effect in his country.
Anyway even without this choice of venue, I do not see anything
preventing Adobe from suing someone in an U.S. tribunal; so the argument
is in my opinion fundamentally flawed. The only thing that it really
restrict is suing Adobe in another country; but that does not seem to be
a problem.
Olive
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
