Hello!
I'm kinda reviving a discussion from the dead, but it's been since
January and pyfiglet is still blocked with its review despite new
versions of the package being licensing-trouble free as they only
include the fonts which are Open Source and safe to include thanks to
the great amount of work of upstream. And so, we'd like to go ahead with
this to finally include pyfiglet into Fedora.
So, without focusing on the legal argument, I wanted to ask here what
was the procedure for going back with a dead review due to legal issues.
Can I for example just "remove" the FE-LEGAL tag or do I need some sort
of re-review/approval from legal?
Greetings,
Lyes Saadi
Le 19/01/2022 à 14:35, Lyes Saadi a écrit :
Hi!
Le 19/01/2022 à 04:16, Jilayne Lovejoy a écrit :
Hi Lyes!
On 1/14/22 5:19 PM, Lyes Saadi wrote:
Hello! And thank you for your answer!
well, I'm not sure I really have an answer - still trying to make
sure I understand the question!
[...]
>> We'd love to have all the fonts included if our legal argument is
solid enough, though, since there is no precedent in US courts (as
far as we know, we are no lawyers), I can understand why it is an
issue for the Fedora Project. But, yes, all the fonts which are now
included are in the « good » license list.
So the specific ask for Fedora now is - can we include the fonts in
the fonts-contrib/ directory as well, instead of only the fonts in the
fonts-standard/ directory - is that right?
Yes, that's what we're trying to do. (Also, removing the FE-LEGAL tag
from the review request for now, since only fonts-standard is included
anyway. I'm not sure that I'm allowed to do that directly.)
I'm not really clear on what the licensing is for the font in the
fonts-contrib/ directory, as the few fonts I opened simply don't have
any explicit license info. Do you know if that is the case (and
therefore the problem in terms of redistribution in Fedora)?
Yes, these files are proprietary and/or have an unknown origin. If we
follow the licensing guidelines for normal (Vector) fonts, it would be
impossible to redistribute them in Fedora.
But, our argument is that all these files should be "insufficiently
creative" to be considered copyrightable in the first place (in the US,
at least), in the same way that Bitmap fonts are not copyrightable. So,
it wouldn't matter what their license is, they would just be under
Public Domain.
Thanks,
Jilayne
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
