Just a quick bit without getting into the meat of this discussion, but I would
hate for all these minds to be spinning around the wrong issue.
A Choice of Venue clause has nothing to do with the Choice of Laws... they
are different questions. Venue is whether the judge, jury, setting is best
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's just a case of multiple licenses, though; if someone asks "is
> this free?", we need to evaluate the licenses applying to the program--
> all of them, not just the most obvious ones. [...]
Fine, see it that way if you like. I don't. If people post
Glenn L McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Its debating "user freedom" vs "free software developers freedom", to
> argue one is more valuable than the other is a chicken and egg argument.
It's trying to balance the original developer's rights against
derived work developer's rights too. I've bee
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:20:29AM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote:
> > > Would a software with the following statement and without any further
> > > copyright or licensing notice be free?
> > >
> > > "Copyright 2005 by XYZ. No rights reserved."
> > >
> > > Any issues with that?
> > This means "all righ
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 10:58:44AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 11:11:15AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> > Glenn L McGrath writes:
> > > hmm, so if parts of the license arent enforcable in the licencees
> > > jurisdiction, then a "choice of venue" clause could be used to d
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:37:53AM -0800, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> The laws that are applied are the place where the alleged violation occurred.
>
> If I break U.S. Copyright Law in Europe, there is no case. U.S. laws have no
> force in Europe. If I break U.S. Copyright Law in the United States
I've been having a hard time finding answers to the following GPL
questions (can anyone here help?) :
I write a piece of software from scratch and release it under the GPL.
At the top of my source files, I have a standard copyright notice:
Copyright (C) 2005 Derek Haines
(as well as the GPL noti
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 15:09:01 +
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:37:53AM -0800, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > The laws that are applied are the place where the alleged violation
> > occurred. If I break U.S. Copyright Law in Europe, there is no
> > case. U.S. l
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 03:05:22PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> And that is why it is *possible* for choice of law clauses to be
> non-free: selection of laws that are intrinsically non-free is no
> different to writing them into the license in the first
> place. Precisely which ones are a probl
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 05:20:14AM +1100, Glenn L McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 15:09:01 +
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:37:53AM -0800, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > > The laws that are applied are the place where the alleged violation
> > > occu
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 08:30:17AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 03:05:22PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > And that is why it is *possible* for choice of law clauses to be
> > non-free: selection of laws that are intrinsically non-free is no
> > different to writing them
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 05:20:14AM +1100, Glenn L McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 15:09:01 +
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:37:53AM -0800, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> > > The laws that are applied are the place where the alleged violation
> > > occu
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 01:58:26PM -0500, Derek Haines wrote:
> If someone (e.g. John Smith) modifies a source file by adding or
> changing lines of code, do they and/or should they then add a
> copyright notice:
>
> Copyright (C) 2005 John Smith
>
> in addition to my original copyright notice?
13 matches
Mail list logo
