Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-23 Thread Nathan Kelley
To OSI License Discussion subscribers, From: Mahesh T Pai [EMAIL PROTECTED], From: Lawrence E. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED], Almost every country specifies that suits for damages should be brought at the place of residence / business of the defendant. You can rarely contract out of that. That

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-17 Thread Mahesh T Pai
Lawrence E. Rosen wrote: Almost every license on the OSI approved list specifies a US jurisdiction. The OSL is specifically intended to be country neutral in that respect. If it isn't, we should make it so. What changes do you suggest? Simple, leave out references to jurisdiction. The

RE: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-17 Thread Lawrence E. Rosen
Almost every country specifies that suits for damages should be brought at the place of residence / business of the defendant. You can rarely contract out of that. That is exactly what I want to contract out of, and I can in many jurisdictions. Licensors shouldn't be burdened by having to

RE: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-07 Thread Lawrence E. Rosen
What happens if you, in the USA, prepare a derivative work based on two OSL licensed pieces of code, one from, say, Taiwan, and the other from France. You are obligated under two licenses, one from the licensor in Taiwan and the other from the licensor in France. Nothing unusual here with

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-07 Thread Bjorn Reese
Henry Pijffers wrote: However, suppose big US company didn't register to do business anywhere in Europe, and just licensed some open source software to me through the Internet, and later decides to change their mind, then how can I defend my rights on anything I did with their software

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-07 Thread David Woolley
You are obligated under two licenses, one from the licensor in Taiwan and the other from the licensor in France. Nothing unusual here with respect to the OSL. Two licenses with different effective terms; there is not one OSL, but one for each of the 100+ countries in the world. It means

RE: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-07 Thread Lawrence E. Rosen
From: Larry Rosen You are obligated under two licenses, one from the licensor in Taiwan and the other from the licensor in France. Nothing unusual here with respect to the OSL. From: David Woolley [mailto:david;djwhome.demon.co.uk] Two licenses with different effective terms;

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-07 Thread David Woolley
think the terms of the OSL are different, or will be interpreted differently, in those other countries? It is true that the OSL -- and The fact that you said that the choice of law was determined by the licensor; if it is unlikely to change, there will be less uncertainty for licensees if it

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-07 Thread Bruce Dodson
- From: David Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 5:47 PM Subject: Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1 think the terms of the OSL are different, or will be interpreted differently, in those other countries? It is true that the OSL

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread Chris F Clark
Perhaps it makes sense (say in a preamble) to mention that certain sections (and obviously which sections) use wording copied from the US copyright code, so that eveyone knows that the reasons the words sound strange is that they are legal jargon with precise meanings -Chris --

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread Henry Pijffers
Lawrence E. Rosen wrote: The word prepare is taken from 17 U.S.C. ยง106, which reserves to the author of a copyrighted work the exclusive right to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work. If the word is good enough for the U.S. Copyright Act, its good enough for me. How good

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread John Cowan
Henry Pijffers scripsit: How good do you think it is for us Europeans and other non-US residents? International copyright law is pretty uniform. Since the license was drawn up in the U.S., the chances are good that any Berne Convention court (which means just about any court nowadays) will

RE: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread Lawrence E. Rosen
-Original Message- From: Chris F Clark [mailto:cfc;TheWorld.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1 Perhaps it makes sense (say in a preamble) to mention that certain sections (and obviously which

RE: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread Lawrence E. Rosen
From: Henry Pijffers [mailto:henry.pijffers;saxnot.com] How good do you think it is for us Europeans and other non-US residents? And on a sidenote, I don't like licenses that designate a specific court of law. I ain't gonna go to the US of A to defend my rights. Under the OSL, if you

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread Henry Pijffers
Lawrence E. Rosen wrote: Under the OSL, if you are the Licensor you determine the jurisdiction. It's your software after all. So if you write and license your software in Europe to customers anywhere, you can defend your rights in Europe under European contract law. This suits me fine when I

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-06 Thread Bruce Dodson
From: Mike Nordell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bruce Dodson top-posted: Derivative Works means derivative works based upon the Original Work, as upposed to derivative works based upon Marvel Comics characters, or derivative works based upon previously-unreleased Elvis tracks. Since the definition

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-05 Thread Bruce Dodson
It seems clear to me, yet another non-lawyer: Derivative Works means derivative works based upon the Original Work, as upposed to derivative works based upon Marvel Comics characters, or derivative works based upon previously-unreleased Elvis tracks. Prepare - it doesn't say to prepare yourself

Re: Approval Requested for AFL 1.2 and OSL 1.1

2002-11-05 Thread Mike Nordell
Bruce Dodson top-posted: It seems clear to me, yet another non-lawyer: Derivative Works means derivative works based upon the Original Work, as upposed to derivative works based upon Marvel Comics characters, or derivative works based upon previously-unreleased Elvis tracks. Since the