Re: Choice-of-Venue is OK with the DFSG.
Sven Luther wrote:
Well, imagine the following case. I have contributed some code to the linux
kernel, if i want to sue SCO over it, i have to go to the US, and ruin myself
in lawyer and other such nonsense. This clearly mean that only the rich and
powerfull have the right to get their licence respected, isn't it ?
Are you not aware that SCO is being sued in Germany and Australia?
Despite being a US-based company, SCO has a physical presence (i.e.
personal jurisdiction) in every country where it has an office, and
arguably in every location where it either sells its "software"[0]
Similarly, did you follow the Microsoft vs. Lindo*s issue? Microsoft
sued in US courts, failed to get an injunction, then "venue shopped" for
a court that would give them the ruling they wanted, ending up in the
Netherlands. If Lindo*s could have argued that venue was improper
because both companies are US companies, don't you think they would have?
Without a choice of venue clause,
you can sue in
1) Your home court,
2) The offender's home court, or
3) The court where the "offense" took place.
You can be sued in
1) Your home court,
2) the plaintiff's home court, or
3) the court where the "offense" took place.
With a choice of venue clause,
you can sue in
1) Your chosen venue,
2) the offender's home court (if you claim that the license has been
broken, then you can sue them wherever you want, subject to the court's
approval[1]), or
3) the court where the "offense" took place (again, subject to that
court's approval[1]).
You can be sued in
1) Your chosen venue,
2) the plaintiff's home court (they can simply not refer to the
license's COV clause in their filing[2])
3) the court where the "offense" took place (they can simply not
refer to the license's COV clause in their filing[2])
--Joe
[0] Some courts have taken the position that a website that is
accessible from that jurisdiction is sufficient. I think this is a
terrible precedent.
[1] The offender may try to move the case to your preferred venue.
[2] It might be a simple matter for you to defend yourself against this
type of action, simply by sending a letter with the COV clause to the
court. However, that may still require competant legal council in that
venue.
Reply to: