Marcel Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I do not understand why you need choice of venue. Unless we know how > that venue treats absent defendants, any ambiguous terms in the licence > and some other things, it looks rather like a licensor trying to get > some advantage, such as being able to use their usual legal team against > a smaller defendant and stopping that defendant being judged by their > own state's people when appropriate. As you note, it isn't usual for > free software licences to specify venue, as there are other agreements > which do that. Why is choice of venue needed?
(Small copyright holder with limited resources, large company with no business presence in copyright holder's state, copyright violation, but I think we've had this conversation before) > The particular choice of Santa Clara County, California for opensolaris > scares me - after all, it's where Adobe of freesklyarov.org fame chooses > as venue for its licence disputes. It's where Sun are based, so it's hardly surprising. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
