legal March 2018

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

6 participants
5 discussions

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

about openssl we may enable and build all elliptic curves on corp ?
by Sérgio Basto 05 Nov '22

05 Nov '22

Hello, I reopen or start thinking again on this question of enable elliptic curves of openssl [1] So going directly to the point, may I built all source of openssl in copr [2] ? or at least some other curves that fedora package don't ship? [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1405843 [2] Version: 1.0.2k %global fips_version 2.0.14 I mean sources: http://ftp.o penssl.org/source/openssl-%{version}.tar.gz and http://ftp.openssl.org/s ource/openssl-fips-%{fips_version}.tar.gz Thanks , -- Sérgio M. B.

4 6

'Fedora' app on Google Play Store
by Mike Simms 15 Mar '18

15 Mar '18

Hello, I contacted Adam Williamson about this last night and he asked me to report it somewhere more official. Here seems the logical place. Please take action if necessary to get the app removed from Google Play Store. Below is a complete copy of what I sent him. "Hello Adam, are you aware of this app in the Play Store and did Fedora Project sanction the usage of the incorrect 'Fedora' developer name and logos associated with it? The permissions required also seem way over the top for what the app supposedly does. It came to my attention because someone posted a question about it on FedoraForum.org today. I'm one of the forum staff there so wanted to check out what was going on with the app. I raised this thread in the forum staff lounge and another admin further raised my suspicions about the legitimacy of the app. The developer name is Fedora, not Fedora Project and the contact email seems to be a made up gmail account. So to say it raises a few warning flags is an under statement. To me, it seems like someone is passing off as 'Fedora' when they have no actual connection to Fedora Project other than being a potentially over enthusiastic user. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fedoraqa.fedora&hl=en If you collectively decide it needs taking down, then someone from Fedora Project with an official connection could start the process by reporting the app via the link on the store page above. I believe they'll take more notice if it comes from an official representative rather than a user. regards, Mike Simms"

4 3

Nagios Open Software License: free software?
by Robert-André Mauchin 05 Mar '18

05 Mar '18

Hello legal folks, I would like some opinions on a license called Nagios Open Software License, used in nrdp (Review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi? id=1284132). It has "open" in the name and the preambule look good ("to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software") but some of the conditions are dubious, specifically Point 3: "may not be forked" and Point 6: "The Software may only be used in conjunction with products, projects, and other software distributed by the Company." It it Fedora-compatible? Full text below: Nagios Open Software License Version 1.3 ---------------------------------------- Copyright (c) 2010-2016 Nagios Enterprises, LLC Nagios Enterprises, LLC (the "Company") hereby grants, free of charge, to any person, company, or legal entity (each a "User") obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software (each a "Use"), and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: 1. The above copyright notice and this license shall be included in its entirety in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. 2. The copyright notices and attribution information included in the Software may not be altered or removed. 3. The Software may not be Forked. "Forking" and "to Fork" means to create or distribute a product or a derivative work of the object or source code of the Software under a new or different brand. 4. Any Use of the Software is subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of the Nagios Trademark Use Restrictions, which are incorporated herein by reference and can be viewed online at http://www.nagios.com/legal/ trademarks/ 5. Any Contribution of materials to the Software by any User is subject to, and signifies, either explicitly or implicitly, the User's acceptance of the terms and conditions of the Nagios Contributor Agreement, which are incorporated herein by reference and can be viewed online at http:// www.nagios.com/legal/contributoragreement/. "Contribution" means any source code, object code, patch, tool, sample, graphic, specification, manual, documentation, or any other material posted or submitted by a User to the Company, directly or indirectly, via the Company's websites, forums, email lists, or other methods of communication. 6. The Software may only be used in conjunction with products, projects, and other software distributed by the Company. Any standalone use of the Software, or use of the Software in conjunction with products, projects, or other software not authored or distributed by the Company - including third- party software that competes with the offerings of Company - is strictly prohibited and is a direct violation of the terms of the license. 7. This license is not intended to restrict any other rights that may be granted to you by other software and associated documentation files that may be included in the Software. If the Software is considered to be a collective work under U.S. copyright laws, the terms of this license do not apply to other contributions of the collective work unless stated otherwise. 8. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM FOR DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) OR OTHER ACTION, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. 9. The terms of this license are subject to the User's compliance with all terms of this license. In the event that any term or condition is violated by the User, the terms of this license terminate and the User shall not have any rights they otherwise might have been granted under this license.

4 3

FSF All Permissive License for AppStream Metadata
by Miro Hrončok 05 Mar '18

05 Mar '18

Hi. One of my package (printrun) has this: # AppData is CC0 License: GPLv3+ and CC0 Since the last time I've touched it, the license of AppStream metadata files has changed [1] to FSFAP [2]. <metadata_license>FSFAP</metadata_license> What should I use in the License tag? I didn't find the license at our list at [3]. Or is it just considered part of GPL, so I keep just that? Do I need to announce this change (that IMHO changes no meaning what so ever) on devel mailing list? [1] https://github.com/kliment/Printrun/commit/71421354cc8ad8f2300ca9450f79605d… [2] https://spdx.org/licenses/FSFAP.html [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

2 2

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal March 2018