Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Nathanael Nerode <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
* allow requirements which prohibit things which would be illegal even if
the original work were in the public domain
The summary is overall excellent, but I disagree with this one point.
In general, choice-of-law and "you must obey the laws of Kazakhstan
with respect to this work" clauses are non-Free, as are "you may not
speed while copying this work" clauses.
Yes... I'm not actually sure we're in disagreement.
We have allowed clauses of the fairly narrow form "You must not do thing
X with this work if it is illegal to do so in your jurisdiction" before,
though I don't care for such stupid clauses. (We have not allowed
clauses which require you to follow laws not present in your jurisdiction.)
We've also allowed choice-of-law clauses, which say "This license should
be interpreted under the laws of Kazakhstan", provided the laws of
Kazakhstan are fairly normal. We have not allowed choice-of-*venue*
clauses, which say that all suits must take place in Kazakh courts.