T&C and such..

While not wanting to get into a discussion on the entire set of T&C of VCM (or any other entity), the local juristicion issue is one that is indeed quite common and IMHO quite necessary. I am a (small) independent software developer. All of my contracts (i.e. those originated by my firm) contain this clause. I also work on a significant number of projects where the client has created the contract. Their contracts contain the same clause (i.e. legal proceedings must be local to THEM). It is a series of trade-off's. Many (most?) disputes are in a range that is covered by a "small claims" court, where the parties represent themselves [no attorney/solicitor]. Since the case must be heard at some physical location I see only four possibilities: 1) One of the two locations agreed to at contract signing. 2) The defendants location 3) The litigants location 4) PSC 468 Box 400 (South Pole Station) so we could see Ethan's wonderful collection! I doubt anyone would agree to item #4... Items 2 and 3 each present problems of bias. If the defendants location is consistantly chosen, it becomes virtually impossible to ever sue since the cost of travel to the destination would often exceed the amount of the suit. The reverse is true if the litigants location is always chosen, suits could become rampant since the defendant would spend more on travel than the cost of the suit. This leaves item #1 as the least of the evils. In my 20+ years in business, I have been both helped and hindered by this. Last November a customer in California (I am in New York) refused payment on work after nearly $3000 of usable product had been delivered, I had to take this as a write-off. About 2 years ago, a client many allegations against my firm, but since substantiating them (ie bringing a civil suit) would have involved travel from Europe to the US, the matter was (semi-)resolved, and then dropped. Not an ideal solution, I agree. But unless someone forms a legally binding Internet court [GOD FORBID!], I do believe these are the options we have. David.