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

[MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop>]

Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 07:27:35PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > It makes it inconvenient for users and debian-legal, needing to
> > know local absurdities of Seaforth or whereever's court procedures.
> 
> By this reasoning, we should reject every package for which someone holds
> copyright, because it is inconvenient for us to know the local absurdities of
> copyright law of Seaforth or whereever.

Not really. There are very widespread international agreements
which give us a reasonably common copyright to use (Berne
Union?). Are there similar treaties about court procedure? If
so, we really could do with knowing about them. I doubt they
exist because even within the EU, courts are very different.

I certainly remember complaints about licences that rely on
some feature of US law (like "fair use rights") without a choice
of law. COV seems a fairly similar but reversed situation.

Even so, convenience isn't necessarily a problem for DFSG. It just
makes it a lot harder to reach consensus. Have you noticed that?

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct