[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Choice of venue, was: GUADEC report

On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 04:15:47PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
>On 2004-07-12 15:46:16 +0100 Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> wrote:
>>>1. someone can explain why choice of venue can be DFSG-free;
>>How is it not, exactly? It does not limit, in any way, your rights to
>>use, modify or distribute the software.
>As I understand it, it limits all those rights by allowing the 
>licensor to require out-of-pocket expenditure by any licensee on legal 
>representation in the given venue, instead of possibly representing 
>yourself in the court local to your offence as seems to happen 
>otherwise. At worst, some of these venues will grant summary judgment 
>against you for not appearing, so it becomes an effective arbitrary 
>termination clause. At best, we need assurance the chosen venue 
>doesn't behave in that way.
>I hope that people will correct me if I've misunderstood the case 
>against these clauses.
>On the other hand, the only case I remember being told for them is 
>that they "ensure consistency" and give the licensor an advantage. 
>Neither of those seem particularly relevant in helping explain why it 
>is acceptable for free software, given the above.

Personally, I can understand why lots of licenses contain these
clauses. That may shield the licensors from jurisdiction abuse by the
licensees, for example. Supposing that the 

>>There's far too much navel-gazing going on here...
>I don't think that observation helps.

There does seem to be a lot of effort being put into inventing
extremely contrived arguments in -legal these days to make various
licenses look non-free. At the current rate, it won't be long before
someone invents a reason to declare the GPL license non-free. That's
why more and more developers are losing patience and paying no
attention to these discussions any more.

Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
We don't need no education.
We don't need no thought control.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: