On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Raul Miller wrote: >On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 09:28:04PM -0600, John Galt wrote: >> It seems that the PBS license has the choice of law clause for >> Virginia, a UCTIA state. In the past, this was enough to make a >> license questionable. Is it enough reason to make it non-free on it's >> own? Remember, the choice of law thing actually makes a weird sort of >> sense, as it IS a click-wrap license, and UCTIA gives a click-wrap the >> force of law. > >Bleah. > >I think here we should show that there's some specific problem with >UCTIA and the OpenPBS license -- I don't think it's fair to reject the >software because there might be a problem, but we're too ignorant to >know whether one actually exists.
You're right, but this is also precedent setting: the first time that a choice of law of a state where UCITA is in effect (it took effect 7/1) has been used in an otherwise free license that was submitted as a candidate to d-l. This may take some time to work out. The clause itself is innocuous, but the undercurrrent of UCITA may very well change relatively straightforward meanings within the license, and the PBS license is definitely not straightforward, as we've been becoming most painfully aware of as of late. For reference, I'll be using http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/ulc/ucita/ucitaFinal00.htm It seems kind of weird using UPenn's law site, but that's where ucitaonline sends you... STAY TUNED :) (I always wanted to say that...) >Thanks, > > -- The early worm gets the bird. Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!
