legal November 2014

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

12 participants
8 discussions

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] CAcert.org license
by Tom Callaway 12 Feb '16

12 Feb '16

On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 23:03 +0100, Matthias Saou wrote: > > >>>>> "TC" == Tom \"spot\" Callaway <Tom> writes: > > > > TC> Given that it does not give permission for us to redistribute (the > > TC> cornerstone requirement for Content licenses), this license is not > > TC> acceptable for Fedora. > > > > I guess I'm glad I looked before approving the package, but I have to > > wonder: Do the cacert folks actually want anyone to use their > > certificates? I mean, this prevents basically everyone from using > > them, because they can't come with the OS or the browser. > > Personally, the more I read the document, the more I'm confused. > > "You may NOT distribute certificates or root keys under this > licence"... does this mean we can distribute under a different license? Well, sortof. The wording here is strange because you can get a different license from the CA issuer. We can't just pick a license, but the CA issuer might be willing to give us a different one. > Would it be worth getting in contact with CAcert.org in order to try > and have them allow us to redistribute the root certs under conditions > which are acceptable to the Fedora Project? Probably, yes. :) ~spot

4 6

reg. fedora name as trademark
by Sindhu S 14 Oct '15

14 Oct '15

hi I noticed there is a website called usefedora.com that sells a product to make online schools. Is this a violation of any trademark that redhat might hold with regards to the Fedora name? Thanks! -- -Sindhu

4 3

winetricks
by T.C. Hollingsworth 01 Aug '15

01 Aug '15

winetricks [1] is free software, but I was originally under the impression that it was ineligible for inclusion in Fedora because it is used primarily to download and install non-free software. (That is not it's only function, though--it also does some registry hacks and can manage multiple WINEPREFIXes.) However, some members of the community disagree [2] and say that it might be eligible for Fedora, so we'd like confirmation one way or the other. Thanks! -T.C. [1] http://winetricks.org/ [2] https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1992#c40

5 7

Transitive Grace Period Public LIcense ("TGGPL") v. 1.0
by Eric Smith 03 Dec '14

03 Dec '14

Is this license, used by Tahoe-LAFS, acceptable for Fedora (and EPEL)? https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/browser/trunk/COPYING.TGPPL.rst?rev=… As you can see, the file starts with a list of exception clauses granting additional permissions, similar to some of the common GPL+exceptions licenses. The license body looks OK to my non-expert eyes; the main differences seem to be that the copyleft requirements are allowed under some circumstances to be delayed for up to a year (section 1c), and the external deployment provisions (section 5), which I think are similar to the AGPL. If there are any issues with the license preventing it from being packaged for Fedora, I think the author may be amenable to working them out. Thanks, Eric

2 3

UROnode licensing question
by Jaroslav Skarvada 28 Nov '14

28 Nov '14

Hi, I wanted to package UROnode, it seemed to be GPLv2+ licensed amateur radio software (mirror [1]), but I came across the following weird text in the package (in addition to the GPLv2 text): > URONode is free to use around the globe with the exception of: > anywhere in or by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts > anywhere in or by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania > > Because of their tactics, any of my software is not to be used in these two > states. Your cooperation is appreciated.. > > - N1URO can be such package included in Fedora? thanks & regards Jaroslav [1] http://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/uronode-2.1.tar.gz

3 7

Claims about Fair License
by Vassilis Palassopoulos 25 Nov '14

25 Nov '14

Hi there, I was searching to find more information about the Fair License and found out it was mentioned here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main The entry in the fedora wiki says it's FSF free, GPLv2 compliant, GPLv3 compliant but I can't find any source for that (e.g. in FSF or GNU website like https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html ). There's an article in wikipedia but it's missing any citation towards these claims. The license is in the list of approved OSI licenses as one can see http://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical but that doesn't say much in regards to the 3 claims. The closest thing I could find is the fact that in an OSI board meeting the WTFPL was considered redundant to the Fair License http://opensource.org/minutes20090304 FSF considers WTFPL a free software and GPL-compatible license https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL Personally, after reading the license, I don't think that the claims are wrong but I'm not an expert and determining the status of a license through the status of another license being used as a proxy could be risky. Are there any reliable sources towards these claims? Is there a reasoning on why they are mentioned in the fedora wiki article (and if so I'd be interested to know what the reasoning is) or does it require more research before stating these claims? Kind Regards, Vassilis Palassopoulos

3 5

opencascade lgpl 2.1 exception
by Jiri Kastner 19 Nov '14

19 Nov '14

hi, is this lgpl 2.1 exception acceptable for fedora - https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tpaviot/oce/master/ OCCT_LGPL_EXCEPTION.txt ? in rpmfusion.org is OCE (opencascade community edition - having some additional work applied) i would like to see it in fedora together in freecad. best regards jiri kastner

2 2

we need updated trademark / logo guidelines for cloud / server / workstation
by Matthew Miller 19 Nov '14

19 Nov '14

I think we should update or add to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines with the new Fedora Cloud, Fedora Server, and Fedora Workstation logos. And possibly https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines as well. How do we go about doing this? -- Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal November 2014