Politics-Free Licence ;)

[Chuck Swiger]

On Jun 28, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>> OK.  If you'd like to find a compromise, perhaps terms like the  
>> following would suit your preferences but avoid hard-coding a  
>> specific jurisdiction into the license:
>>
>>  * 3. Users of this Software agree that any legal matters  
>> pertaining to the
>>  *    Software or this License acknowledge the right of the author 
>> (s) to select
>>  *    a local "court of appropriate jurisdiction" and have any  
>> such matters
>>  *    adjudicated under the laws of the author's country, state,  
>> or province.
>
> I'm not sure if this doesn't make it worse, Chuck. If we don't know  
> what system of law is assumed in the interpretation of the license,  
> or if it varies from use to use, I believe the community  
> uncertainty it produces is worse, not better.

Worse for whom?

There's a reason why the GPL makes a great deal of effort to spell  
out terms that might be assumed in one system of law but might not in  
other, because they (meaning the FSF and others) want the license to  
have the same interpretation worldwide.  This goal may not be  
perfectly achievable because some jurisdictions prevent the  
disclaimer of warranty, et cetera, but nobody who writes Free  
Software or OpenSource software *wants* to be sued or deal with  
related legal crap in a completely foreign jurisdiction to them.

If someone wants to sue me over software which I've made public for  
everyone to share, modify, and use, the least they can do is show up  
and do so in the courtroom in my neighborhood, rather than halfway  
around the world.  I don't see how this hurts authors or users of  
software, it only affects people who intend legal action against the  
authors or redistributors of the software in that they need to put  
somewhat more effort into their attempt....

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck