legal April 2017

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

8 participants
7 discussions

Sleepycat license with SaaS restriction
by Florian Weimer 08 Jul '25

08 Jul '25

cryptlib is licensed under the Sleepycat license with a SaaS restriction: “Note that decoupling the software from the user, for example by running in a SaaS configuration, does not exempt you from these requirements.” (Full text attached.) This was not part of the original Sleepycat license, so a new license tag is required. Maybe this license is not even free; this additional clause seems to be a restriction on use. But perhaps it is not so different from the AGPL. Thanks, Florian

6 8

Henry Spencer's license
by Petr Šabata 06 Mar '23

06 Mar '23

Dear legal, While checking the contents of our `perl' package, I noticed the following: (...) /* NOTE: this is derived from Henry Spencer's regexp code, and should not * confused with the original package (see point 3 below). Thanks, Henry! */ /* Additional note: this code is very heavily munged from Henry's version * in places. In some spots I've traded clarity for efficiency, so don't * blame Henry for some of the lack of readability. */ /* The names of the functions have been changed from regcomp and * regexec to pregcomp and pregexec in order to avoid conflicts * with the POSIX routines of the same names. */ (...) * pregcomp and pregexec -- regsub and regerror are not used in perl * * Copyright (c) 1986 by University of Toronto. * Written by Henry Spencer. Not derived from licensed software. * * Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any * purpose on any computer system, and to redistribute it freely, * subject to the following restrictions: * * 1. The author is not responsible for the consequences of use of * this software, no matter how awful, even if they arise * from defects in it. * * 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either * by explicit claim or by omission. * * 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not * be misrepresented as being the original software. * **** Alterations to Henry's code are... **** **** Copyright (C) 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, **** 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 **** by Larry Wall and others **** **** You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public **** License or the Artistic License, as specified in the README file. (...) You can see the whole file here: https://metacpan.org/source/SHAY/perl-5.20.1/regexec.c I looked but couldn't find any common name for this license of Henry's. Is it on our list? Is it free? What name should I use in the License tag? Thank you, Petr

5 9

Hack Open Font License
by Randy Barlow 18 Apr '17

18 Apr '17

Hello! I am interested in packaging the Hack Font for Fedora, but I notice that it seems to have what may be a custom license: https://github.com/chrissimpkins/Hack/blob/master/LICENSE.md Is this license acceptable for Fedora?

6 12

Nil license
by Jitka Plesníková 11 Apr '17

11 Apr '17

Hi the license of Perl module perl-Authen-CAS-Client was change from 'MIT' to 'Nil' license (see below). changes from 0.07 to 0.08 ========================= * updated Makefile.PL to reflect changes in default @INC handling v5.25+. * fleshed README with documentation * added README.md for GitHub * updated to 'Nil' license http://cpansearch.perl.org/src/PRAVUS/Authen-CAS-Client-0.08/LICENSE 'This software is information. It is subject only to local laws of physics.' Can you please confirm whether it is free or non-free? Thanks, Jitka -- Jitka Plesníková Software Engineer Red Hat

2 1

Fedora patches License
by Remi Collet 11 Apr '17

11 Apr '17

Hi, Guidelines have statement about spec file License. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#License_of_Fedor… Shouldn't this be extended to Fedora specific patches ? (not upstreamable) Remi. P.S. I was asked about a patch license from another project wanting to reuse it, so I answer MIT per FPCA terms/

1 0

BioPython license change
by Antonio Trande 11 Apr '17

11 Apr '17

Hello. Starting from biopython-1.69, BioPython is released under the "Biopython License Agreement" that is not currently listed among Good Licenses for Fedora. Needs legal review. Bugzilla ticket: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440337 Upstream notes: http://biopython.org/wiki/Biopython License: https://github.com/biopython/biopython/blob/master/LICENSE Regards. -- -- Antonio Trande sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org See my vCard.

2 1

Guidelines for publishing container images
by Florian Weimer 06 Apr '17

06 Apr '17

Do we have some guidelines how to publish corresponding source code for container images? I suppose that if the container image repository supports image layering, it should be possible to publish a layer on top, with the SRPMs for the RPMs used to construct the container image in the file system, and put that image in roughly the same place (where users hopefully can find it). Thanks, Florian

2 2

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal April 2017