Re: Adobe open source license -- is this licence free?
Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org> writes:
> Jeremy Hankins writes:
>> Yes, but (as you point out in your pine example) that can happen
>> regardless of license. There are some things we simply can't protect
>> against.
>
> Indeed, but we can refuse to make it easier for a malicious actor or
> more costly for their victims (where those victims become such by
> using Debian).
We could, but does the DFSG require it? There are other, non-malicious
reasons for choice-of-venue, as others have pointed out.
>> The argument against choice-of-venue that I've heard is that it might be
>> a choice that has strange or restrictive law that heavily favors the
>> copyright holder. As far as I know (and I haven't read the whole
>> thread) no one's making that argument about California. And to a
>> certain extent, a nations laws always are able to remove freedoms that
>> free software would like to permit, and there's not a lot we can do
>> about it. Let's not tilt at windmills here.
>
> That would be the argument against choice-of-law clauses. The
> argument against choice-of-venue is that any licensor can drag a user
> into court in the licensor's preferred venue rather than a venue that
> the user would otherwise be subject to.
Ah. I assumed (perhaps erroneously) that the choice of venue impacted
the choice of law. I take it that the two issues are unrelated?
--
Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
Reply to: