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

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

Scripsit Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:
>> Scripsit Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>

>>> The licensor *already* has carte blanche to harrass licensees with
>>> fivolous lawsuits.

>> No - if the court throws out the case ex officio because of lack of
>> jurisdiction, no harassment results.

> Eh? They can sue you in your jurisdiction.

Yes they can. But that gives me excellent chances to convince the
court that the case is devoid of merit - *without* having to spend a
fortune and tons of time on travel.

> In the case you're worrying about (obnoxious large businesses suing
> people in order to intimidate them), the difference in cost is
> unlikely to deter them.

The point is that the cost *for me* of defending myself is much more

>> According to your argument, the GPL and BSD license must be pointless,
>> because they don't contain any obnoxious choice-of-venue clauses.

> If the licensor doesn't have enough money to enforce them, then yes, I
> think they're pointless. What's the point of a license that you can't
> enforce?

In the free software world, the point of having a license is to
*allow* others to use, share and extend your software.

> The DFSG are not holy writ, but how about if I phrase it as
> discrimination against licensors without money?

That wouldn't make your argument more coherent. We're concerned
exclusively with which rights the *user* gets. Whether the author
thinks it is worth it to give the user those rights is not something
we consider at all. We can just observe that sufficiently many
software authors *have* been willing to do so that we can put together
a good free OS. There is no reason to start including software in our
OS where the user only gets freedoms with this kind of strings

Henning Makholm                           "I always thought being *real* sad
                                        would be *cooler* than acting *fake*
                                 sad, but it's not. It's not cool at *all*."

Reply to: