Re: choice of law clauses and GPL

[Alan Mackenzie]

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <h6j2no$2e2c$1@colin2.muc.de>, Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> 
> wrote:
>> > Don't confuse a choice of law clause with a choice of venue clause. The 
>> > later specifies the jurisdiction in which lawsuits must be brought.

>> I think it's you that's getting confused.  If the choice of law is
>> Californian, the case can't be decided in a German court.  Or do you
>> disagree with this?  Again, produce an example of a real case, please.

> This may help you out:

> <http://www.dr-hoek.de/EN/beitrag.asp?t=Conflict-of-law-real-estate-mortg
> age>

Eh?  I don't need "helping out", and the page you've cited is a long,
theoretical, abstract tome, whose relevance to the pertinent question is
at best problematical.  Just for emphasis, that question is the ability
of a court in one country to administer the laws of a different country.
It's not about "conflicts of law".  That page is also tedious in the
extreme to somebody like me who isn't fascinated by legal niceties for
their own sake.

I'm putting it to you, in a polite but firm manner, you are simply
mistaken with the notion that a German court could and would settle a
dispute under Californian law.  That this applies for fairly comprehensive
values of "Germany" and "California".

If you can't stump up the evidence, you should admit your mistakenness.

Does the page you've cited contain a pertinent concrete example somewhere
within it?  If so, please point it out.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).