Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote: I don't see it recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees It doesn't fit the trademark guidelines either. While Red Hat can legally grant a license to anyone and doesn't have to abide by the guidelines, I would expect it to do so nevertheless. So why a special exception for Russian Fedora? There shouldn't be a special case, and it's possible that Red Hat's distributor in Russia may have granted some sort of permision that (a) it shouldn't have, and (b) it didn't even have the authority to grant. The Russian-specific portions of this thread seem to have moved over here, where I responded to a similar thread. http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2009-June/msg0.html --Max -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Stephen Gallagher wrote: Is there a reason that an interested party (in a locale where such export is legal) couldn't just create a custom spin on their own (and using their own build system) to create a Fedora-T6 spin (or for trademark reasons, rebrand it)? I can see this being a perfectly good premise for setting up a SIG... I thing such regional spins exists now. For example RussianFedora in Russian [1]. It includes mp3 codec and many other, because Russia do not admit software patents. Furthermore, it is not just illegal spin, [2] cite: At a key meeting with Werner Knoblich, Red Hat Vice President for EMEA, he announced support for a Russian Fedora association and for Red Hat development in the Russian Federation. He also expressed support for open source infrastructure and applications, and the development of a repository for industry best practice. [snip] Both Red Hat and VDEL, the organizers of Russian Fedora projects, will provide this center with financial and technological support and also help to build the wider local and international IT industry network needed for this Ministry initiative =end cite= So, it is inspired by RedHat and it is not set any barrier to ship it with software what prohibited in main Fedora! So, back to main question - this is example of Europe-based infrastructure. On that any who wish may build self own spins as I think. [1] http://russianfedora.ru/ [2] http://www.osldistribution.com/news (second news) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 16:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 05/31/2009 03:52 PM, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote: Stephen Gallagher wrote: Is there a reason that an interested party (in a locale where such export is legal) couldn't just create a custom spin on their own (and using their own build system) to create a Fedora-T6 spin (or for trademark reasons, rebrand it)? I can see this being a perfectly good premise for setting up a SIG... I thing such regional spins exists now. For example RussianFedora in Russian [1]. It includes mp3 codec and many other, because Russia do not admit software patents. Furthermore, it is not just illegal spin, I don't know about illegal but the name Russian Fedora is a violation of the Fedora trademark guidelines, clearly. Usage of trademark was granted to Russian Fedora by agreement between Red Hat and other company that represent it here, AFAIK. Max Spevack was on presentation on Russian Fedora launch. Alexey -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On 05/31/2009 05:24 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 16:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Usage of trademark was granted to Russian Fedora by agreement between Red Hat and other company that represent it here, AFAIK. Max Spevack was on presentation on Russian Fedora launch. I don't see it recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees It doesn't fit the trademark guidelines either. While Red Hat can legally grant a license to anyone and doesn't have to abide by the guidelines, I would expect it to do so nevertheless. So why a special exception for Russian Fedora? Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 17:33 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 05/31/2009 05:24 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 16:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Usage of trademark was granted to Russian Fedora by agreement between Red Hat and other company that represent it here, AFAIK. Max Spevack was on presentation on Russian Fedora launch. I don't see it recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees It doesn't fit the trademark guidelines either. While Red Hat can legally grant a license to anyone and doesn't have to abide by the guidelines, I would expect it to do so nevertheless. So why a special exception for Russian Fedora? I don't know the details of an agreement, ask legal team for that. Alexey -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On 05/31/2009 05:48 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 17:33 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 05/31/2009 05:24 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 16:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Usage of trademark was granted to Russian Fedora by agreement between Red Hat and other company that represent it here, AFAIK. Max Spevack was on presentation on Russian Fedora launch. I don't see it recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees It doesn't fit the trademark guidelines either. While Red Hat can legally grant a license to anyone and doesn't have to abide by the guidelines, I would expect it to do so nevertheless. So why a special exception for Russian Fedora? I don't know the details of an agreement, ask legal team for that. I don't need to know the details of the agreement. If any such agreement exists, it should follow the trademark guidelines that Fedora set for rest of the community and not be given special exceptions. Can the Fedora Board look into this? Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 05/31/2009 05:24 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 16:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Usage of trademark was granted to Russian Fedora by agreement between Red Hat and other company that represent it here, AFAIK. Max Spevack was on presentation on Russian Fedora launch. I don't see it recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees It doesn't fit the trademark guidelines either. While Red Hat can legally grant a license to anyone and doesn't have to abide by the guidelines, I would expect it to do so nevertheless. So why a special exception for Russian Fedora? Rahul I also do not known details of legal, but may be just contact RedHat and add domains russianfedora.ru and russianfedora.com to the list https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees ? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Tom Lane, Tue, 26 May 2009 19:00:19 -0400: Unless everyone working on Fedora *moves* to the Isle of Man (and obtains citizenship there), I don't think this sort of maneuver keeps us out of trouble anyway. Realistically we all have to worry about the laws of wherever we live. So as long as a significant fraction of Fedora contributors are in $country, $country laws will matter for Fedora. (Repeat above statement for a rather long list of $country.) Of course, I was joking and I think that clicking on one link on The Site Which I Rather Won't Call By Its Name and confirming that I want to install new repository is not that big deal. Matěj -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: Bill Nottingham wrote: Peter Lemenkov (lemen...@gmail.com) said: ... what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Make it legal to ship MP3 code? Sorry, those are patented in Europe as well. Patents are *currently* illegal in Europe, (though they may be granted). The patents offices being self-funding and all that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_the_European_Patent_Convention Article 52 Codec patents are generally not 'software patents' in the common patent-speak meaning of the words. A typical (well written) codec patent will make little or no mention of computer software. Instead they speak of specific useful transformations of information in mechanical terms as well as machine embodiments. This puts them largely outside of the domain of what is normally discussed in the content of software patents (which, have recently been written abstractly without any real reference to any machine or mechanical process). The bulk of codec patent holders are European companies (I.e. Fraunhofer, Nokia, etc). The collection of royalties for codecs is a multi-billion dollar a year industry. There are many well funded companies spending considerable amounts of money licensing codecs, even on products which they only intend to market in Europe. On that basis, I think it's safe to conclude that there is more to the situation than you are suggesting. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 00:17 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: Gregory Maxwell wrote: Codec patents are generally not 'software patents' in the common patent-speak meaning of the words. But they most likely cannot be enforced against pure software. However, in some European countries (e.g. Germany), you can get in trouble for shipping things like hardware MP3 players without a license (even if the MP3 codec is implemented in software), some devices got confiscated at CeBit. Kevin Kofler Which leads to some fuzzyness, like what about a computer vendor selling PCs with Fedora preloaded? Does that constitute a hardware device? -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: Patents are *currently* illegal in Europe, (though they may be granted). The patents offices being self-funding and all that. Codec patents are generally not 'software patents' in the common patent-speak meaning of the words. Not if you ask the patent lawyers, no. The bulk of codec patent holders are European companies (I.e. Fraunhofer, Nokia, etc). The collection of royalties for codecs is a multi-billion dollar a year industry. There are many well funded companies spending considerable amounts of money licensing codecs, even on products which they only intend to market in Europe. On that basis, I think it's safe to conclude that there is more to the situation than you are suggesting. That's certainly true. None the less, Frank is right. These patents *are* illegal, if you read what the convention and the national laws actually say, and yet they are granted by routine. Whether they would hold up in court doesn't matter much apparently. They are effective anyway. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Peter Lemenkov (lemen...@gmail.com) said: Subj. As Debian folks did years ago. Such branching will be done very easy technically. Because all the builds and composition is done in the US, and the trademarks are held by a US entity. Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
2009/5/26 Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com: Subj. As Debian folks did years ago. Such branching will be done very easy technically. Because all the builds and composition is done in the US, and the trademarks are held by a US entity. Not a serious reason. Why not to relocate then in Europe? -- With best regards! -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 21:10 +0400, Peter Lemenkov wrote: 2009/5/26 Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com: Subj. As Debian folks did years ago. Such branching will be done very easy technically. Because all the builds and composition is done in the US, and the trademarks are held by a US entity. Not a serious reason. Why not to relocate then in Europe? -- With best regards! Find us a Company in Europe that is not based in the US that is willing to fund with people and money as much as Red Hat is doing now. Oh, Europe won't help much, there are just as many silly laws there as there are in the US. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Peter Lemenkov (lemen...@gmail.com) said: Subj. As Debian folks did years ago. Such branching will be done very easy technically. Because all the builds and composition is done in the US, and the trademarks are held by a US entity. Not a serious reason. Why not to relocate then in Europe? ... what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Make it legal to ship MP3 code? Sorry, those are patented in Europe as well. Make it so we can ship to various T-6 countries? I'm sure many European countries have their own lists as well. Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On 05/26/2009 01:25 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 21:10 +0400, Peter Lemenkov wrote: 2009/5/26 Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com: Subj. As Debian folks did years ago. Such branching will be done very easy technically. Because all the builds and composition is done in the US, and the trademarks are held by a US entity. Not a serious reason. Why not to relocate then in Europe? -- With best regards! Find us a Company in Europe that is not based in the US that is willing to fund with people and money as much as Red Hat is doing now. Oh, Europe won't help much, there are just as many silly laws there as there are in the US. Is there a reason that an interested party (in a locale where such export is legal) couldn't just create a custom spin on their own (and using their own build system) to create a Fedora-T6 spin (or for trademark reasons, rebrand it)? I can see this being a perfectly good premise for setting up a SIG... -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761 Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Chris Weyl wrote: A US corporation is subject to US law no matter where it operates. Sounds serious to me :) I think the idea is to found a Fedora foundation outside of the US to own Fedora instead of RH. The reason given for not creating a foundation was that US tax laws are problematic, creating it outside of the US would mean favorable tax laws could be chosen as well. That said, RH may still get into trouble for contributory infringement, and with a non-US foundation, RH may even get accused of tax evasion, so I'm not that surprised they aren't thrilled by the idea. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 13:29 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: Peter Lemenkov (lemen...@gmail.com) said: Subj. As Debian folks did years ago. Such branching will be done very easy technically. Because all the builds and composition is done in the US, and the trademarks are held by a US entity. Not a serious reason. Why not to relocate then in Europe? ... what exactly are you trying to accomplish? ...that isn't achieved, in practical terms, just as well by the existence of RPMFusion? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Find us a Company in Europe that is not based in the US that is willing to fund with people and money as much as Red Hat is doing now. Oh, Europe won't help much, there are just as many silly laws there as there are in the US. 1) Your packets will still flow through the US anyway. 2) The US claim jurisdiction even outside their national borders and reserve the right to prosecute offenses against American interests according to US law, irrespective of where they take place. In other words, you could be extradited even if the offense would not actually be an offense in your country. For example, Dutch people have been extradited for selling drugs to US citizens in The Netherlands, even though marihuana is legal. (well, its complicated) Also, you could never set foot in the US again without getting arrested, and most of us don't think those T-6 countries are worh that. Is there a reason that an interested party (in a locale where such export is legal) couldn't just create a custom spin on their own (and using their own build system) to create a Fedora-T6 spin (or for trademark reasons, rebrand it)? I can see this being a perfectly good premise for setting up a SIG... respin what? remove the crypto? Try removing nss, openssl, gnutls and kerberos and see what's left of your system. Not much :P And who would want it? Surely not the T6 countries :P Paul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Bill Nottingham wrote: Peter Lemenkov (lemen...@gmail.com) said: ... what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Make it legal to ship MP3 code? Sorry, those are patented in Europe as well. Patents are *currently* illegal in Europe, (though they may be granted). The patents offices being self-funding and all that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_the_European_Patent_Convention Article 52 Frank -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com writes: Jesse Keating, Tue, 26 May 2009 10:25:36 -0700: Oh, Europe won't help much, there are just as many silly laws there as there are in the US. Better is some special place in Europe thinking ... what about Isle of Man, it has some exceptions from many laws ... err, we wouldn't be first Linux distro headquatered there :) Unless everyone working on Fedora *moves* to the Isle of Man (and obtains citizenship there), I don't think this sort of maneuver keeps us out of trouble anyway. Realistically we all have to worry about the laws of wherever we live. So as long as a significant fraction of Fedora contributors are in $country, $country laws will matter for Fedora. (Repeat above statement for a rather long list of $country.) regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
