On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Phillip Lord <phillip.l...@newcastle.ac.uk > wrote:
> Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> writes: > > >> Are you saying the corrupt judges of the corrupt legal system will act > >> differently just because you have chosen a license with a choice of law > >> clause that's referring to the law in effect at other side of the > planet? > >> > > > > Oh good grief don't be ridiculous. I'm saying pick the jurisdiction you > > think most likely to deliver lawful governance. I don't care which side > of > > the planet or which planet. > > No, he is correct. You pick a jurisdiction by being in it. I clearly did not have enough coffee this morning. Choice of law != choice of venue. But I suspect the point holds, which is just that there are tradeoffs involved - omitting a choice of law clause just gives you a different set of potential headaches. I think I'll stop now. heh. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
