On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 10:09 +0930, Tim wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > >> Fedora cannot (as a US organisation) point an end user at a repository > >> for free but US patent violating material. Merely providing a link is > >> an offence and there is caselaw to prove that (the infamous 2600 DVD > >> case). > > Patrick O'Callaghan: > > Is this transitive? i.e. if RH points at an offshore site which contains > > nothing but pointers to the sensitive material, is it still a violation? > > If it's not, problem solved. > > Surely, even if that sort of thing was possible. As soon as they were > informed (one way or another) that link in the middle was pointing to > something that they're not allowed to do themselves, they'd have to > cease referring to the referrer. I would think it virtually certain that some link on some RH page points at some other page where some link points at some other page where (repeat as necessary) where there's a pointer to the forbidden fruit. The question is how indirect does the reference have to be. > > Of course I think like a mathematician, not like a lawyer. > > Methinks you forgot regression. Huh? poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
