On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:02:29 +0200, Leonard den Ottolander <leonard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What needs to be avoided is that such software is mixed with free > software in the repository. I have a whole laundry list of policy questions regarding how to deal with non-free software. What licensing terms are allowable in Core? Which are excluded based on informed legal opinion considering liability compared to being excluded based on policy? What licensing terms are allowable in Extras? Which are excluded based on informed legal opinion considering liability compared to excluded based on policy? Can Fedora host or maintain a non-free repository? Is it worth it or does it detract from the Core objectives? Is there a way that Fedora Core can advertise or encourage the use of add-on repositories that have less restrictive policy regarding licensing? What are the legal liability constraints? Can Fedora leadership lay down guidelines that add-on repositories can choose to abide by that make legal liability issues involving things like linking a non-issue? I'm thinking guidelines involving how an addon's repository and website are structured so that murky issues about DMCA styled linking lawsuits can be avoided, but fedora can still point people to addon repos that technically act as a non-free repository. -jef
