Marco d'Itri writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>>>Basically, the clincher for me is that our mirrors can't simply carry the >>>>software we distribute without coming under some fair degree of risk due to >>>>this issue. >>> This would not be enforceable anyway, at least in sane jurisdictions. >>Why would it not be enforceable? In the USA, choice of venue clauses > Because consent by the mirror operator is even less dubious than with > users and a normal shrink wrap license.
I am going to assume you meant consent by the mirror operator is *more* dubious than with users, but consent can be assumed when the mirror operator (or user) exercises rights that are only granted by the license. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
