On 12/11/2011 08:13 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > In other words, say there are a small number of source files in a packaged > (tarball) work that lack any or clear copyright header, should that be > considered a review blocker? > > IANAL and being a generally pragmatic fellow, I'd hoped that we could > generally give upstreams the benefit of the doubt, for lack of any contrary > evidence. So, the answer here is yes (with caveats), as long as we have clear evidence that the files are part of a larger work where there is consistent licensing intent. CAVEATS: If the files look like they were copied from somewhere else (or we know they were), then we need to clarify the per-file licensing. If there is no overall licensing statement for the project (e.g. a README stating that the project is BSD), then we need to clarify the per-file licensing. If there are a mix of licenses in play, and it is a confusing situation where some binaries end up being GPL-incompatible while others are GPL-compatible, then I'd say we need to clarify the per-file licensing. In any case, we should be trying to get upstream to resolve those issues, even if it isn't blocking inclusion in Fedora. ~tom == Fedora Project _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
