Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C licence
[Sorry for sending unfinished letter.]
> Francesco Poli dislikes the choice of law and courts clause, but I
> think it's fine.
IBM PL v1.0 contains a choice of law clause and it’s listed as suitable for Debian’s main [0].
As for arbitration clause, could anyone explain, what’s the practical difference between ‘choice of law of N’ and stating that disputes should be resolved in *general jurisdiction* courts of N? IMHO, they are effectively the same.
[0] https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/
> (IMO it would not be fine if it specified Russian or Chinese courts.)
Interesting idea. Any substantiation for such a discrimination of origin?
Reply to: