On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 01:18:55 -0500 Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > On 1/25/06, Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote:
> > > > Any dispute arising out of or
> > > > related to this Agreement shall be brought in the courts of
> > > > Santa Clara County, California, USA.
> > >
> > > This is a choice of venue and is considered non-free by many
> > > debian-legal contributors (including me...).
>
> To be more specific, we generally consider choice-of-venue non-free
> when it applies to suits brought by the copyright holder (/licensor)
> against other people.
>
> It's free when it only applies to suits brought by other people
> against the copyright holder (/licensor).
Yes, I agree.
Thanks for clarifying what I wrote.
I apologize for having not stated this so clearly.
>
> I don't know if you could get Adobe to change this, but you might
> actually be able to do so. Usually the writers of such licenses
> only really care about the free case, and haven't thought about the
> non-free case.
Well, of course it's something that could be asked to Adobe...
>
> This is the only problem with the license as it applies to the code.
> (The documentation under the license is non-free because it can't be
> modified, of course.)
Indeed.
Poor documentation! Too often under a much more restrictive license than
executable code! :-(
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......................................................................
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpYmV0xW3Q41.pgp
Description: PGP signature