Changes between Version 5 and Version 6 of ApertureLicense

Timestamp:

10/10/05 20:41:59 (19 years ago)

Author:

anonymous

Comment:

--

ApertureLicense

@@ -23 +23 @@
 '''Built-in patent defense''' - when you sue someone (either a developer or a user) for a patent infringement related to this code, all your rights (patent- and copyright-related) for this codebase should be withdrawn. This defense should be formulated in a fair way, e.g. it should not involve infringements by a contributor outside this project.
 
-'''External deployment ''' -  making a derivate work available as a service on a network to others outside your organisation should be considered as a form of distribution. The license should demand that under these circumstances the derivative should also be made available under the used open source license.
+'''External deployment''' -  making a derivate work available as a service on a network to others outside your organisation should be considered as a form of distribution. The license should demand that under these circumstances the derivative should also be made available under the used open source license.
+
+'''Local jurisdiction''' - we prefer a local court (i.e. Dutch or German, depending on who is involved) rather than one in California (MPL) or New York (CPL).
+
+So far, all these demands are (not coincidentally) met by the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.1.php OSL].
 
 == To Discuss ==