Am Dienstag, den 14.02.2006, 22:24 +0100 schrieb Joerg Schilling: > Well, then you obviously need to remove _all_ GPL packets as any > person could sue you anywhere in the world because of the _missing_ > choice of venue.
If I am not doing business there and can still be sued *without* having agreed to this choice of venue, than I am lost anyway -- a court there could very well override the choice of venue clause. A license can't protect against arbitrary jurisdictions. > Debian currently includes MPL based packets in "main" and the MPL is > definitely > less DFSG compliant than the CDDL. Just for the record: MPL is considered non-free by most Debian Developers (not sure about an official statement): http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/06/msg00221.html Could you please name a package which is a) in Debian under MPL b) not in non-free c) is not being worked on to get another license. Please note that e.g. firefox is actively being worked on (in this case: by upstream): http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=330295 > The fact that nobody seems to start a MPL related discussion looks like > the CDDL discussion on Debian-legal has been started by some trolls who > just like to discriminate against the CDDL. MPL was considered non-free even before CDDL was published. There are some very practical matters with it (keep source code online for a certain time) which make MPL a pain for every distributor, leaving issues of freeness aside. I don't mind continuing this discussion, but I suggest dropping the @debian.org addresses from CC. Regards Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
