See: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/214
I'm just looking for a quick clarification on whether it's our position that
mp3 falls under patented code we should avoid packaging even as source.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Arch
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 03:40:57PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> See: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/214
>
> I'm just looking for a quick clarification on whether it's our position that
> mp3 falls under patented code we should avoid packaging even as source.
(Dou
- Forwarded message from Amos Blanton -
> Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:43:47 -0500
> From: Amos Blanton
> To: Matthew Miller
> Subject: Re: [Scratch] scratch gpl licensing -- combining with apache, and
> gpl v3
>
> Thanks for writing about this. These licens
ay.
I asked for further clarification on the restriction on GPL v3, because it's
my understanding that the patent clauses already existing in the Apache
license are precisely why the GPL v2 isn't compatible.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
_
GPL v2. There is also
original Squeak code, under a combination of MIT and Apache 2.0 licenses.
The question basically comes down to: is distributing that together okay
under the GPL v2?
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
___
legal
GPL v2?
> So everything MIT has written here is what is licensed under GPLv2?
Everything the Scratch team at MIT has written is, yes. The other Squeak
code in the Scratch image is covered under the MIT and Apache 2.0 licenses
as described at http://www.squeak.org/SqueakLicense/
file starts by being explicit
about the version number "Scratch 1.4 is licsend under the GPL v2" with no
"or later version" clause -- but it is ambiguous in the next sentence.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
___
official Fedora cloud images?
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
about
> whether we need to get usage approval for the Fedora name to use it in
> the organization name. fedora-infra has their own GitHub organization so
> there is at least some precedence here.
Also the Fedora Cloud logo (as made by the Fedora Design team).
--
Matt
Y-SA logo
at the bottom. Are *you* using the Wordpress license plugin (as in
https://fedorahosted.org/marketing-team/ticket/159 which started all this)?
--
Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project--
___
legal mailing list
legal@l
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
or spin
Where the UUID would be randomly generated, not used for anything else,
and regenerated within a relatively short window (because tracking over
time isn't the intent). The log could discard IP addresses so those
wouldn't be correlated as well.
--
Matt
at we simply replace Board with Council
everywhere it appears.
From a legal perspective, is there any issue with this?
Thanks!
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
t; you will prevent/protect against, outside the scope of your local
> data protection laws.
Yeah, I think we're familiar with that from the (banned in Fedora)
"don't be evil" clauses in licenses. But I think Paul was saying he'd
add the mo
ull header of the message, I can help you identify where it
really came from. Unfortunately, though, since it's unlikely that the
message actually touched anything we control, there's not much we can
do about it.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
__
urrent random example?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
Sorry, "apparently random". :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
(non-open source) courseware
formerly at that domain name is now renamed.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
;m looking with the Fry
meme* at a couple that say "Source code available (open)".
* https://imgflip.com/s/meme/Futurama-Fry.jpg
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedora
sign up for accounts
> Excellent, thanks!
I have mine. It's from May 11, 2005. I'll send it when I'm on a better
internet connection.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fed
gOn Sat, May 21, 2016 at 03:03:48PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I have mine. It's from May 11, 2005. I'll send it when I'm on a better
> internet connection.
Sorry, March, not May.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
_
Attached. As you can see, it's personalized to me. That may explain
why no public annoucment is easily findable — everyone got a personal,
unique email instead.
Note that the address and phone number here are no longer valid several
times over.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
tations those things bring.
From a legal standpoint: a) does this make sense and b) what would we
need to do make it happen?
1.
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/council-disc...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UMUXRADSRXI3WPKSKQGLYGHJFCBG53QO/
--
Matthew Miller
F
e, would we need to modify the existing trademark
guidelines or could this be an additive guideline?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
e
world". It also might apply to services, or maybe even things which
contain _zero_ traditional-official-Fedora software, both of which I
think would be straining the idea of "Remix".
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal
able to use the *primary* marks in a
> controlled way, but Matthew can correct me if I'm wrong.
I freely admit to being unclear on the exact legal meaning there.
"Fedora Remix" is the current secondary mark, and also clearly includes
the primary "Fed
he practical impact is
largely on the packaging side, so FPC would be another important
stakeholder group.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
identifiers? Or do we have the reverse situation as well?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
.
> I certainly wouldn't have felt the need to ask something like this a few
> years ago, but nowadays I guess everything is possible.
Lars, I'm curious. What has happened that has made you lose trust?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
__
2017, April 2017, and December 2017, and some people argue that
> the last one affecting decoding may have been the one that expired in
> September 2015, but I don't know of anything that changed in 2016.
Unfortuantely, I can't comment on
ecoders, or is it something specific to the mpeg123 library?
It is not specific to the mpeg123 library.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
een agreement). Encoding functionality is not
permitted at this time."
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:32:10PM -0600, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> Oh, and also:
> * MPEG-2 video decoding (e.g. libmpeg2)?
The statement we have been given says nothing about that.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailin
ly
> > think is still valuable for things like spec files and other
> > miscellaneous non-explicitly-licensed contributions.
> Yeah. I think it is still useful for wiki content and spec files, at a
> minimum.
Does this need to be an explicit agreement, or can it be a "by
part
n 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).
Is there any value in bundling them up in that way, rather than just
pointing to the original source RPMs?
--
.de/en/ff/amm/prod/audiocodec/audiocodecs/mp3.html
As seen on another list, mp3 encoding is indeed now okay.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
hat "License In = License Out" is adequate for
projects on Github; I think Spot's concern with spec files is that we
don't give them an explicit license (right)?
As we're moving things, can we do something in Pagure to cover this, so
the FPCA isn't needed here?
--
Matt
the pagure instance running on the top of our dist-git.
In that case, I *think* we might just be able to have a blanket
statement. Let's see what Legal says?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedorap
her than requiring an
explicit account agreement.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
LOFL
I'll leave it to legal to say whether they agree that that's the
probably intent and whether it *works* like that.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
alese
contexts is really an endeavor we want to get into.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
elines#Domain_names,
and also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains
In general, a custom domain discouraged, as it can lead to all sorts of
problems. How about fedoralive.fedoracommunity.org?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal
won't -1 it, but there's a
little bit of a chicken and egg problem — if we do something like this,
I'd like it to be for something we feel pretty confident is going to be
around and self-sustaining in a year or two.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
ackaging Guidelines
>
> Ugly: Package does not have Legal Issues, does not meet Fedora Packaging
> Guidelines
>
> You may put "Good" and "Ugly" packages in a Copr.
> You may put "Good" packages into Fedora.
> You cannot put &
irement is not just to make the source code
available, but to make it available _under the terms of this license_.
As suggested, please take further dicussion to legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
(cc'd).
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
nable. What if a Fedora
install image had, say, twelve such pieces of software. That's quite a list
of autoexec.bats to email to various places.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To u
aconda-testing.fedoraproject.org/tool-name/recipe
to avoid cluttering the fedoraproject.org/* space with things we need to
keep up with forever even if we change what that site runs on or points to.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailin
ich would be
less ongoing maintenance? Thanks.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedorapr
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 09:01:39AM +0100, Zdenek Veleba wrote:
> I'm not sure that I understand, maintenance of what?
Lists of URL spaces that are reservered / redirected.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list
lauses. Fedora doesn't (and can't) do that.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
sure if it is OK for inclusion in
> Fedora. Could someone please have a look?
There's a "no commercial use" clause which makes the license clearly not
open source. There may be some other things but that's a hard stop.
Possibly it could be packaged into Flathub, or a non-
like, but I couldn't find any resources on things
> like Logos and Names.
Logos might fall under "content" rather than code. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Content_Licenses
Unlike with code, we permit licenses for content which restrict modification
as long as th
images
would innocently find their way into a Fedora edition that ships on a
product that is for sale (a laptop or a phone or an iot device), what would
the repercussions be?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lis
etty much everywhere.) Like, for example, voting. So all of
that would need to be addressed, making this at least A Project.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
public attribution via changelogs.
I agree with Neal here as a deep gut reaction. Recognition is important,
even if it is buried pretty deeply from endusers.
That said, uh, we trim changelogs, so if we're arguing that that's the
attribution part, we have some digging th
;changelog too long, removing old entries" (either
as the last entry, or just apparently). Offhand, I think firefox is one
example I've seen recently.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
gests F15. https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/2481
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
system. :P
Off-topic, but: not so! This is still there in the IPA backend and available
in the API even though it's not exposed in the UI right now. I can see it. :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.
thing we need to do to note that for content to which the old
default license applies, the 4d waiver was waived? Or can that just be a
matter for the archives in the unlikely event it ever comes up?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal maili
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 04:27:19PM +0200, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
> Well, are there any chances for legal to reevaluate the ability to ship
> the Brainpool ECC within Fedora and/or RHEL?
I'll see what I can find out.
--
Matthew Miller
n you link to
something documenting this requirement? I coulnd't find anything in a quick
search. (It's okay if it's in German.)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscri
other - maybe even more important -
> use cases related to the German health care system:
> - eAU https://www.kbv.de/html/e-au.php
> - ePA (electronic patient records): https://www.kbv.de/html/epa.php
Thanks both of you -- I'll forward these on and see if it helps.
--
e string
(case-insensitive) "caldera" does not appear in any of the files under
/usr/share/licenses/ on my system.
1. Funding for this project wanted!
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraprojec
ch package (so after patches and other manipulation)
3. corresponding upstream trackers where available
... or possibly pay Sourcegraph to do it for us. They seem like nice people.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@
;).
Yes please. I'm not going to fight colloquial usage, because that'd be
silly, but for formal use like this, yes. It's the distro that's under the
license, not ... all of us. :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
__
open source licenses getting into "that
big foot-race that happens to be in capital of Massachusetts every year" or
"I guess we'll just all say Superb Owl" territory.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing lis
e plan right now is to have the list in machine-readable form, and
generate a human-readable document for docs.fedoraproject.org which contains
a table plus explanatory text. That way, there aren't two lists to keep in
sync.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedo
"LicenseRef-" syntax here.
Something like: "LicenseRef-Fedora-Logos"
Were I the one painting the bikeshed, I would have picked a string other
than "LicenseRef" for this purpose, but as I understand it, the paint is
dry.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
enty of non-FOSS licenses.
I, for one, am okay with our few non-FOSS licenses using the weird syntax.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le..
hare/licenses/fedora-logos/COPYING on an installed Fedora system. It
is this: https://pagure.io/fedora-logos/blob/master/f/COPYING
This is probably a rabbit hole of giant proportions. :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal m
ure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1142#_1__38
Although given the context here, I note that that's ambiguous about whether
the _whole expression_ must be on the list — I don't think that's the
intention!
[CC'ing this to the legal list, btw.]
--
M
ists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproj
#x27;s very common for us to use the
name of a piece of software in Fedora Linux release announcements. Like,
"This release now includes WordNet 3.0", or whatever.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing l
So, these things move slowly, but this _is_ being worked on. I'll let
you know when I can.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 05:19:34PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I will check back again.
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 06:21:05PM -, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> > Hello Matthew,
&g
h, I think we might
consider an F38 change. As soon as that's approvided, and after that date,
people can start making the changes in Rawhide. We can decide separately if
we care about them also being in F37 or older. (It's probably nice to also
allow that, but there's something to be s
and etc. But it
would be possible to do in your own infrastructure as well.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
ely so that this is easy to do. If you find them elsewhere, that's a
bug.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code
well. I don't remember being asked about that before, honestly. (I
think many people using the remix option add their own logos, and use
"Fedora Remix" as a kind of badge.)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing lis
re most easily
handled, aimed at Rawhide either shortly after the branch (August) or the
next one branch (February 2023). That should get us to 80-90% coverage.
Then, sometime around the F40 timeframe, we can actively check on anything
that's not updated with a
you like to see more transparency in particular?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedor
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 03:47:34PM -0600, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
> Okay, so that is a bit more info than I probably needed...
Probably! Sorry. :)
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
of “udpate”
Fixed. Thanks.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en
lem with Linux app
distribution to which our policies around licensing, software freedom, and
etc., are incidental. This makes it a different case.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To uns
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 07:13:28PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev wrote:
> Can you elaborate? Which packages from RPM Fusion repository we
> can't redistribute?
Let's not speculate about RPM Fusion software here, please.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedor
/message/F7UMYNEYLBJDTXND6D5ZUHK7CTM2NY5Y/
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraprojec
ow reply here. I am working with Legal to get the trademark
pages updated to better cover use cases which have developed since they were
written.
I don't think we _want_, as a project, to dissuade people from using Fedora
base images as they were intended.
--
Matthew Mille
on. If you have questions,
please post them to the Fedora Legal mailing list:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org/
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproj
2].
I think this is apples and oranges? The gnutls change you link references
SRP, which is mentioned as no longer removed in the openssl "hobble" script.
The remaining question is the ECC stuff.
Which, to give an update: is still under investigation.
--
Matthew Mi
mehow like
"firmware", but I'm very skeptical about that.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-approval/#_allowed_for_firmware
All of that stuff is kind of irrelevant if there is *no* license, though.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
__
On Sat, Nov 05, 2022 at 04:26:49PM +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> I'm sending this email to second the "request to stop hobbling crypto
> libraries" and avoid the need of a opensssl-freeworld package
And I'm confirming that this is actively being looked at. :)
--
Matt
On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 05:31:10PM +0200, Felix Schwarz wrote:
> Am 06.04.22 um 16:13 schrieb Matthew Miller:
> >So, these things move slowly, but this _is_ being worked on. I'll let
> >you know when I can.
>
> Thanks :-)
> The day Red Hat is able to distribute t
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/does-distributing-a-kickstart-file-containing-non-free-repositories-violate-fedora-licensing-guidelines/86697
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
mark.
>
> Richard
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 2:09 PM Richard Fontana wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 10:14 AM Matthew Miller
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/does-distributing-a-kickstart-file-containing-non-free
o ask if we should ask FPC to add
AI models (and perhaps some of Tim's helpful definitions) to the examples of
"permissible content" higher on that same page.
But I am not going to do it today, because there is enough going on with xz
and now the KDE change proposal that I can't ha
94 matches
Mail list logo
