Re: Status of the picture book
Michael Naughton wrote:
Nicu:
Frankly, companies usually use clauses like this to dissuade individuals
from suing them. Effectively, by signing the document the company and
individual agree to the location of any possible lawsuit and what type
of law that is to be applied. In the United States each state has its
own law. Some states' law is more favorable for certain positions than
others. For example, many corporations use Delaware as their state of
incorporation because it is seen as having a body of state law that is
more corporation friendly.
Mike,
I fully understand that, but I am living in the EU and most likely will
never get into Delaware, so the chances of me going into Delaware to sue
Red Hat are ZERO. And why I would prefer a corporate-friendly law in
Delaware instead of a citizen-friendly law from Europe?
And I guess I can claim at any time that not being a native English
speaker (even more, not having *ever* learned English formally) I didn;t
fully understood what I signed. You know, a citizen-friendly European
law may be helpful here :p
Nicu Buculei wrote:
> Michael Naughton wrote:
>> I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if
>> there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a
>> choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and
>> Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would
>> agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware,
>> etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red
>> Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something
>> together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed
>> to practice in Michigan).
>
> I am a potential photographer living in the Europe, the people posing
> for me will be most likely from the EU, what do we should care about
> states in the USA?
--
nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com/
photography: http://photoblog.nicubunu.ro/
my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/