Re: CDDL, OpenSolaris, Choice-of-venue and the star package ...

[Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net>]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 08:05:02AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Marco d'Itri writes:
> 
> > vorlon@debian.org wrote:
> >
> >>Is a license that requires micropayments in exchange for distribution rights
> >>free?  If not, why is a cost measured in terms of legal risk imposed by the
> >>license more free than one measured in hundredths of a cent?
> > Because it's not obviously a "cost".
> 
> I have already explained why it *is* a cost.

It's a potential cost, not an actual cost.  I think the cost is much lower
than you are making it out to be.  If the lawsuit is truly frivolous (meant 
only for harassment), the only cost should be that of retaining a local
attorney in the chosen venue to represent you.  Appearing personally 
would probably not even be required.

On the other hand, if the court decided that the complaint had merit, you
would have to defend yourself anyway, regardless of the venue.  The costs in
travel time and airfare would likely amount to only a small portion of the 
total cost of defending yourself, as an attorney could represent you for 
most of the proceedings.

As others have said before, this mostly boils down to a convenience factor.
This clause makes the venue convenient for the copyright holder in matters 
of enforcement, as opposed to making it convenient for the (suspected)
copyright violator.  That's ok with me.

--Adam