On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 12:21:47AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > Well, imagine the following case. I have contributed some code to the linux > kernel, if i want to sue SCO over it, i have to go to the US, and ruin myself > in lawyer and other such nonsense. This clearly mean that only the rich and > powerfull have the right to get their licence respected, isn't it ?
And with a choice of venue clause, you file litigation in your home country against John Hacker for similar reasons, and he can't defend himself for the same cost reasons. This clearly means that only the rich and powerful have the right to defend themselves against accusations of copyright infringement, doesn't it? This goes both ways. I believe the choice of venue should remain the default: up to the relevant laws to decide, which is far more likely to be fair and equitable to both parties than a one-sided choice of venue clause, chosen by the original author. -- Glenn Maynard