Changeset - 730a079cc774
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-21 16:54:15
bkuhn@ebb.org
Comment out these sections.
1 file changed with 28 insertions and 28 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -3696,34 +3696,34 @@ No substantive changes have been made in sections 15 and 16.
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: more, plus 17
 

	
 
% FIXME: Section header needed here about choice of law.
 

	
 
% FIXME: reword into tutorial
 

	
 
Some have asked us to address the difficulties of internationalization
 
by including, or permitting the inclusion of, a choice of law
 
provision.  We maintain that this is the wrong approach.  Free
 
software licenses should not contain choice of law clauses, for both
 
legal and pragmatic reasons.  Choice of law clauses are creatures of
 
contract, but the substantive rights granted by the GPL are defined
 
under applicable local copyright law. Contractual free software
 
licenses can operate only to diminish these rights.  Choice of law
 
clauses also raise complex questions of interpretation when works of
 
software are created by combination and extension.  There is also the
 
real danger that a choice of law clause will specify a jurisdiction
 
that is hostile to free software principles.
 

	
 
% FIXME: reword into tutorial, \ref to section 7.
 

	
 
Our revised version of section 7 makes explicit our view that the
 
inclusion of a choice of law clause by a licensee is the imposition of
 
an additional requirement in violation of the GPL.  Moreover, if a
 
program author or copyright holder purports to supplement the GPL with
 
a choice of law clause, section 7 now permits any licensee to remove
 
that clause.
 

	
 

	
 
% FIXME: does this need to be a section, describing how it was out then in
 
% FIXME-LATER: Section header needed here about choice of law.
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: reword into tutorial
 

	
 
%% Some have asked us to address the difficulties of internationalization
 
%% by including, or permitting the inclusion of, a choice of law
 
%% provision.  We maintain that this is the wrong approach.  Free
 
%% software licenses should not contain choice of law clauses, for both
 
%% legal and pragmatic reasons.  Choice of law clauses are creatures of
 
%% contract, but the substantive rights granted by the GPL are defined
 
%% under applicable local copyright law. Contractual free software
 
%% licenses can operate only to diminish these rights.  Choice of law
 
%% clauses also raise complex questions of interpretation when works of
 
%% software are created by combination and extension.  There is also the
 
%% real danger that a choice of law clause will specify a jurisdiction
 
%% that is hostile to free software principles.
 

	
 
%% % FIXME-LATER: reword into tutorial, \ref to section 7.
 

	
 
%% Our revised version of section 7 makes explicit our view that the
 
%% inclusion of a choice of law clause by a licensee is the imposition of
 
%% an additional requirement in violation of the GPL.  Moreover, if a
 
%% program author or copyright holder purports to supplement the GPL with
 
%% a choice of law clause, section 7 now permits any licensee to remove
 
%% that clause.
 

	
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: does this need to be a section, describing how it was out then in
 
% then out then in? :)
 

	
 
Finally, the FSF shortened the section on ``How to Apply These
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)