On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 12:07:52PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > You could ask Anthony whether you're allowed to publish his reasons on > -legal. That would do the project a great favor.
You could just ask me directly you know... ] > I thought choice-of-venue is non-free by default? ] ] Via Simon Phipps's talk at debconf, we've got Sun on the record ] as interpreting "choice of venue" as only being relevant when the ] two parties to a suit both have a presence in multiple jurisdictions, ] including the one that's "chosen", which means it's not a problem at all. ] ] For the other case, even if Sun did want to make German laws apply to ] an Australian or similar, I don't think that holds up as a claim anyway. I don't think that's a particularly useful addition to what's already been in this thread. Well, beyond as inspiration as to how much better -legal could do if it was willing to come to with a conclusion of the form "this license is flawed in these novel ways, but none of them are enough to make it non-free for Debian". Cheers, aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
