Re: Choice-of-Venue is OK with the DFSG.
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 08:41:57AM -0400, Joe Moore wrote:
> 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]
Well, did you heard the case where, i think it was california, decided that it
could sue people all over the world ?
> 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?
Sure, but all of those are big companies, i am just a lone developer, i
wouldn't even know where to look if SCO or Microsoft where to steal my code
and be irrespectuous of the licence. And since i contributed some (very small)
amount of linux source code, at least i could be suing SCO for not respecting
the GPL, could i not, like IBM is doing ? Now if i could go to tribunal here
and fill the suing, this would be well more costly, _and_ i would have much
more faith in the impartiality of the judge, given the bad example of
money-dominated courts you see in the US.
But i don't really care, this clause has been dropped from the ocaml licence,
so it doesn't affect me at all.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: