On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> >> Put another way, if we're going to make concessions and tell people >> how to get said software in our documentation, why would we not make >> those same concessions, with the same messaging, in our software where >> legally possible? > > > I understand it but a couple of wiki pages don't serve that case very well. > I could setup a redirect now in a couple of minutes and the argument is It's not lost. It's moved ;) > lost. If you want to argue that point, the MUCH better example is > proprietary firmware. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Binary_Firmware > > We clearly have made a concession there and you could argue that we are > extending that concession to cover more types of non-free software. I > don't necessarily agree but atleast it is a relatively strong argument > compared to some random wiki pages. They aren't random. They were vetted and approved by Fedora Legal as being pages that can reference third party repositories. They are, to my knowledge, the only such pages approved in a legal sense. If they were random, I would have deleted them or had them deleted as I did the other pages that were found that weren't approved. josh _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
