<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoPlainText>I wrote this provision in OSL 3.0 because I thought it would be more fair to the licensor of the software, who created it and donated it to the world:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText style='margin-left:.5in'>“Any action or suit relating to this License may be brought only in the courts of a jurisdiction wherein the Licensor resides or in which Licensor conducts its primary business, and under the laws of that jurisdiction excluding its conflict-of-law provisions.”<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>For most large companies that license their software, this includes most countries where they conduct their “primary business” and where their licensees presumably exist. The provision has an obviously more limiting effect for small licensors who shouldn’t have to chase around the world to find bad licensees.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Choice of jurisdiction isn’t just an afterthought. Brad Kuhn wrote: “Choice of law clauses have always tempted FOSS license drafters. Good FOSS license drafters resist the temptation — knowing that it'll cause more trouble than help.” Brad is wrong.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>/Larry <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Lawrence Rosen<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>707-478-8932<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>3001 King Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>-----Original Message-----<br>From: License-review <license-review-bounces@lists.opensource.org> On Behalf Of Pamela Chestek<br>Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 2:40 PM<br>To: license-review@lists.opensource.org<br>Subject: Re: [License-review] For Approval: Open Logistics License v1.2</p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>On 12/12/2022 2:01 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Pam,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Just to pipe in as a practitioner, not a lawyer. One of the major <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> differences between EPL-1.0 and EPL-2.0 was the removal of the <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> license's choice of law provision. We spent something like 15 years <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> arguing that the certainty provided by the choice of law provision was <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> valuable. I don't remember winning that argument once in all that <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> time. In my experience, both adopters and contributors viewed the <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> choice of law as a negative.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> I would also add that if you sort open source licenses by usage you <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> will find that something like 95%++ of all free and open source <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> software is currently made available under licenses which do not have <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> a choice of law provision. So as a purely practical matter I consider <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> this debate settled in favor of do not have a choice of law provision.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I don't disagree that it seems disfavored, but I was curious why, especially after someone challenged me and I didn't have a good answer. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>And the reason seems to still be ... just because?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Pam<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Pamela S. Chestek<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Chestek Legal<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>PO Box 2492<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Raleigh, NC 27602<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>pamela@chesteklegal.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>(919) 800-8033<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>www.chesteklegal.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>License-review mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>License-review@lists.opensource.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>