Our community must handle dissent respectfully, while also recognizing the restrictions that we are forced to live with. I understand and sympathize with Roozbeh. And yet, the only *real* restriction here is that we may not *directly* distribute Fedora into embargoed destinations -- everyone knowing perfectly well that no *actual* restriction can ever be implemented. --g ------------------------------------------------------------- Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors ------------------------------------------------------------- On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Mark Webbink wrote: > Roozbeh is certainly welcome to his opinions, but having been through > this discussion many times before, this is a non-issue. Fedora is > U.S.-based, and Red Hat, as its distributors, has an obligation to abide > by U.S. law regardless of what the GPL may say. That law forbids the > export of Fedora to certain countries and individuals. Anyone who > knowingly distributes or permits the distribution of Fedora in violation > of U.S. export control laws is subject to substantial fines and criminal > conviction. This is not dissimilar to the laws in other countries that > regulate the import and export of goods, including computer software, > and Fedora is obligated to respect all of those. The fact that these > laws exist does not override the intent of the licensor, i.e., that > Fedora is free software, nor does it in my legal opinion violate the GPL > (understanding that others, including the FSF, may disagree with me on > this point). However, the GPL does not relieve anyone from complying > with the national laws in those countries within which they reside. > > Mark > > Patrick W. Barnes wrote: > > >Roozbeh Pournader just posted the following on the fedoraproject.org wiki > >within his personal namespace. I wanted to bring this to everyone's > >attention. For Roozbeh, this is a bit of a personal issue, since export > >control in the U.S. technically requires that we not ship Fedora to Iran, > >where Roozbeh is located. > > > >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RoozbehPournader/EULA > > > > > > > >>I am planning to keep notes about the problems of the Fedora EULA here. I > >>consider this personal Fedora-related space, and am using this to help keep > >>information about the problems > >>[http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/i386/e > >>ula.txt the current EULA] creates, specially by making Fedora non-free > >>software. > >> > >>The main issues are: > >> * Fedora is not free software > >> * Fedora is not open source software > >> * Fedora violates the GNU General Public License > >> * EULAs are bad > >> > >>Random posts from my blog: > >> * http://www.advogato.org/person/roozbeh/diary.html?start=8 > >> * http://www.advogato.org/person/roozbeh/diary.html?start=9 > >> > >>== Fedora is not free software == > >> > >>== Fedora is not open source == > >> > >>== Fedora violates GPL == > >> > >>== EULAs are bad == > >> > >> > > > >Further reference: > > > >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Licenses/EULA > >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Export > > > >IANAL... > > > >I don't see merit in all of Roozbeh's concerns, but they're worth looking into > >for the sake of Doing the Right Thing. > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >fedora-advisory-board mailing list > >fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx > >http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > > > > > _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly