On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 09:23:03AM +0400, olive wrote: > >In a nutshell, this choice of venue discriminates against people who > >live far away from Santa Clara County, California, USA and thus fail > >DFSG#5. Those people can be forced to travel around the planet in order > >to defend themselves in a dispute raised by the copyright holder. > > I am not at all convinced. First, I wonder if this choice of venue is > legal.
If it's not legal, or not enforcable, that doesn't make it any less non- Free. If it's really known to be unenforcable, then the copyright holder should be willing to remove it from the license, and prevent the confusion (and misleading claims). Personally--speaking for my own particular case--I don't care about flying around the world; flying from Massachusetts to California is quite too far. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
