On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 15:09 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > The argument that "everyone else is doing it, so it must be fine" is > also completely false. As my mother eloquently put it to me at age 6, > "If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?". That's not the argument I'm putting forward. The "French cannot waive copyright" argument brings you to the conclusion you stated; "[The license] is not valid, we can't use it". That same argument holds, as far as I can see, for every other distributor. So effectively we're arguing that everyone else, Red Hat included, is either oblivious to the legal risk or they looked at it and came to the wrong conclusion. All of them. I'm not saying that's true one way or another, but it would seem to me that at least getting a second opinion would be worthwhile, because Fedora's legal resource appears to be making some pretty extraordinary claims. And if it is true, I would bet there are significantly more problems that aopalliance, since there are very few [no] licenses which deal with EUisms like moral rights, database rights, etc... Cheers Alex. -- This message was scanned by Better Hosted and is believed to be clean. http://www.betterhosted.com -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
