Re: Choice-of-Venue is OK with the DFSG.
Andreas Barth writes:
> * Michael Poole (mdpoole@troilus.org) [040818 00:25]:
> > Bruce Perens writes:
>
> > > Choice of venue can be a useful clause for the purpose of protecting
> > > Free Software authors from frivolous lawsuits /against them /in venues
> > > where it is difficult or impossible to defend themselves, but where
> > > they could still be damaged. In general such damage would be due to
> > > reciprocal treaties or the fact that they might someday wish to visit
> > > a nation where a judgement exists against them.
>
> > Which nations have courts that ignore personal jurisdiction to such an
> > extent? Are those nations known to respect choice of venue clauses in
> > copyright-based licenses?
>
> What do you mean by "personal jurisdiction"? E.g. for a lawsuite in
> the USA it is sufficient if the person who claims to be damaged lives
> there.
See Google for analysis of the concept; for example,
http://www.cyberspacelaw.org/kesan/kesan1.html and
http://www.ssbb.com/what.html. The US Supreme Court has thrown out
cases brought against someone in a state where they neither live nor
do business because the original court did not have personal
jurisdiction over the defendant. Lower courts have also enforced the
minimum contacts test mentioned by those pages.
Michael Poole
Reply to: