On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 18:03 +0400, Dmitry Butskoy wrote: > Patrice Dumas wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 05:28:45PM +0400, Dmitry Butskoy wrote: > > > >> Randy Wyatt wrote: > >> > >>> Why wouldn't a hard copy of the GPL suffice ? > >>> > >> Yep, but GPL is not approrved officially in our (and many other) > >> countries. I know that some users do notarially certified translation of > >> GPL, but it costs money too. (Hopefully the ranslation of GPL only is > >> enough, not BSD, MPL etc.) > >> > > > > since Russia is a member of the Berne Convention, if I recall well, some > > lawyer consider that there shouldn't be a need for a translation and > > even that no translation is better. > Yes. It is the reason why hardware "comes back after the 2 week > checking". Fortunately. > > In any case I am not convinced that this discussion belongs to > > fedora-devel-list, although I am not sure that there exists a list about > > those kind of issues. > > > "Fedora-devel" implies not home enthusiasts only. Normally a lot of > things we use in some non-home place, and all such places are affected. > > Consider the situation: you go to your employer and say "I want to help > to develop Fedora, let's change our, say RHEL2, server to Fedora 7, I > can guarantee that I'm skilled enough to support this". What the > employer shoild answer? "No, I don't want troubles wiith policy, because > your Fedora is not accompanied with any hard copy legal documents". :( The Fedora wiki pages link to a list of all approved licenses for packages. You could systematically go through and print off each of these. It's a bit hard for Fedora to distribute hard copy material given that Fedora doesn't distribute anything physical. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
