On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 20:26 -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > It is implicit in the "only licenses approved by the FSF or OSI are OK > > for Fedora". > > I'm afraid it isn't. AFAIK GPLv3 will be the first Free Software > license to stop the kind of practice I'm alluding to. Well, I doubt we will move to a "only GPLv3" licensing policy anytime in the near future. > FWIW, I misunderstood what you wrote. I seemed to me that you were > saying the board wouldn't agree to making a public commitment not to > accept such agreements, rather than what I now think you meant, that > the board wouldn't accept such agreements. Right? Yes, that's right. > >> What sorts of things exactly? It depends on what you understand by > >> "limiting users' freedoms." Requiring certain images to be removed, > >> for example, doesn't. Howver, requiring them to be replaced to keep > >> the software functional, and having lots and lots of them, would turn > >> the replacement into an unsurmountable work, which would effectively > >> limit the freedoms. What do you think the board would disagree with? > > > I don't think the Fedora Board would make any trademark or patent > > agreements that would limit user freedoms. > > Then I guess the board might be willing to make clear its > unwillingness to accept such agreements, no? You'd have to ask them. :) ~spot _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
