[Fedora-legal-list] Legal aspects of fedora based appliances
Hello. Fedora contains various tools for appliance creation. AFAIK it is intended that Fedora shall be used as a base for various appliances ISVs or OEMs want to create. But there is there some legal-guide which summarizes the legal aspects of Fedora based appliances e.g. when I want to distribute a Fedora AOS with some proprietary software? (As some kind of media-center). Greetings fabian ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Legal aspects of fedora based appliances
Am Mittwoch, den 09.12.2009, 16:14 -0500 schrieb Paul W. Frields: On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 09:57:10PM +0100, Fabian Deutsch wrote: Hello. Fedora contains various tools for appliance creation. AFAIK it is intended that Fedora shall be used as a base for various appliances ISVs or OEMs want to create. But there is there some legal-guide which summarizes the legal aspects of Fedora based appliances e.g. when I want to distribute a Fedora AOS with some proprietary software? (As some kind of media-center). I'm assuming you mean guidance on whether, and how, these types of appliances can use the Fedora name and associated trademarks. You can find our full trademark guidelines here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines The particular section on appliances and OS images is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_unmodified_Fedora_software https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_combinations_of_Fedora_software_with_non-Fedora_or_modified_Fedora_software The usage of the Fedora tardemark is just one point. There are more questions (for me at least :) ), like: Will a appliance providers have to keep the sources of all distributed packages, even if they are official Fedora packages? - fabian ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Please define effective license (for the love of consistency)
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Wednesday 09 December 2009, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: 1) I came across another review with the same license question. The source files have one of the GPLv2, GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ headers each. They get compiled and produce 1 final binary executable. None of the headers (or other source code files) go to the final RPM. What goes to the license tag of the package? Ref: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537325#c4 2) Hypothetical question (although happens rather frequently): What if there was a -devel subpackage and .h files with different licenses ended up in this -devel subpackage? Aren't both questions answered pretty well by https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines ? Nope. I wouldn't ask if they were. Orcan ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Legal aspects of fedora based appliances
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 10:22:07PM +0100, Fabian Deutsch wrote: Am Mittwoch, den 09.12.2009, 16:14 -0500 schrieb Paul W. Frields: On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 09:57:10PM +0100, Fabian Deutsch wrote: Hello. Fedora contains various tools for appliance creation. AFAIK it is intended that Fedora shall be used as a base for various appliances ISVs or OEMs want to create. But there is there some legal-guide which summarizes the legal aspects of Fedora based appliances e.g. when I want to distribute a Fedora AOS with some proprietary software? (As some kind of media-center). I'm assuming you mean guidance on whether, and how, these types of appliances can use the Fedora name and associated trademarks. You can find our full trademark guidelines here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines The particular section on appliances and OS images is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_unmodified_Fedora_software https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_combinations_of_Fedora_software_with_non-Fedora_or_modified_Fedora_software The usage of the Fedora tardemark is just one point. There are more questions (for me at least :) ), like: Will a appliance providers have to keep the sources of all distributed packages, even if they are official Fedora packages? Spot or someone else will correct me if I go wrong here, but because the Fedora Project ships source pursuant to the requirements of the GPLv2 section 3(a), downstream remixers cannot simply point to the Fedora Project for source distribution (as in section 3(c)). This is intentional and unlikely to change in the near future. Also, section 3(c) as I understand it is not workable for commercial redistributors. The best solution I can imagine is for downstream remixers to simply prepare the matching source collection, and offer it at the same point of distribution under GPL 3(a) as well. IANAL, TINLA, and so forth. -- Paul W. Frieldshttp://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
