Peter, thanks for the quick reply! Perhaps fedora-legal can provide useful advice? John On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 06:31:03PM +0300, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > Hello John! > > 2010/2/25 John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > Peter, > > > > We are in the process of reviewing packages for RHEL-6. The review > > of b43-openfwwf generated the comment below. Do you have any input? > > I'm sure, that GPL does NOT cover the text of the README, since it > simply a dump of web-page, and I didn't think they licensed their site > contents under GPL :) > > > Perhaps README.openfwwf needs to be removed or revised? > > Although, I almost absolutely think that nobody will sue Redhat for > inclusion of this text, I think, that properly re-licensing a README > is a generally good idea. At least we should ask upstream for > clarification - could you ask someone, who skilled enough in solving > these boring legal issues? I could contact them by myself, but I'n not > sure, what should I ask them. To send us e-mail with license > clarification or to add README (listed below) to their tarball. > > Just for the reference - here is a full text of README > > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/b43-openfwwf/devel/README.openfwwf?view=co > > -- > With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- John W. Linville Linux should be at the core linville@xxxxxxxxxx of your literate lifestyle. _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
