On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:38:37 + Ian Jackson wrote:
> Dmitry Alexandrov writes ("Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C
> licence"):
> > [Ian:]
> > > (IMO it would not be fine if it specified Russian or Chinese courts.)
> >
> > Interesting idea. Any substantiation for such a
On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 02:47:43 +0300 Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
[...]
> > Francesco Poli dislikes the choice of law and courts clause, but I
> > think it's fine.
For the record, I think a choice of law clause is acceptable.
On the other hand, I consider a choice of venue clause as a non-free
On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:04:48 + Ian Jackson wrote:
> Drew Parsons writes ("Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C licence"):
> > If I'm reading that right, we can link it from BSD and LGPL libraries.
> > Currently MUMPS is in Debian used by
> ...
> > code-aster GPL2
>
> This is a problem
On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 11:04 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Drew Parsons writes ("Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C
> licence"):
> > If I'm reading that right, we can link it from BSD and LGPL
> > libraries.
> > Currently MUMPS is in Debian used by
>
> ...
> > code-aster GPL2
>
> This is a
Drew Parsons writes ("Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C licence"):
> If I'm reading that right, we can link it from BSD and LGPL libraries.
> Currently MUMPS is in Debian used by
...
> code-aster GPL2
This is a problem then.
Is there any possibility of CeCILL being persuaded to add a
Dmitry Alexandrov writes ("Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C licence"):
> [Ian:]
> > (IMO it would not be fine if it specified Russian or Chinese courts.)
>
> Interesting idea. Any substantiation for such a discrimination of origin?
Some courts are more trustworthy than others.
Ian.
6 matches
Mail list logo
