Re: Adobe open source license -- is this licence free?
On 1/26/06, Francesco Poli <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:30:32 +0100 Achim Bohnet wrote:
> > You may not modify the Documentation.
> As already pointed out by Andrew Donnellan, Documentation is non-free:
> it actually fails DFSG#3.
> > 6. GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION.
> > 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...).
> In a nutshell, this choice of venue discriminates against people who
> live far away from Santa Clara County, California, USA and thus fail
> DFSG#5. Those people can be forced to travel around the planet in order
> to defend themselves in a dispute raised by the copyright holder.
Personally I think choice of venue clauses are reasonable, because it
only discriminates against those who have broken the license. Also I
don't think Adobe is going to sue you for a minor violation.
> > MetadataFrameworkSDK.09.13.01_10:44
> > ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED
> > LICENCE DE LOGICIEL LIBRE
> There seem to be two versions of the license: one is drafted in English,
> the other in French.
> It is not clear to me which version is the official one.
> Or are they both official and any of them may be chosen, at the
> recipient's option?
> Since I'm not qualified to read French legalese, I cannot check if the
> two versions have indeed the exact same meaning (which is not easy to
Maybe the French translation is for Quebec, where I think French
language is needed in legal documents. And no, I can't read French.
I think this license is free enough for Software only, except everyone
else seems to hate choice of venue clauses.
Jabber - firstname.lastname@example.org
Member of Linux Australia - http://linux.org.au
Debian user - http://debian.org
Get free rewards - http://ezyrewards.com/?id=23484
OpenNIC user - http://www.opennic.unrated.net