On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 12:00 -0600, Richi Plana wrote: > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 21:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > I am not talking about any repo files. Just a pointer in documentation > > or in any application. The details are explained in FAB list. That > > requires Legal to look into this. No amount of layman arguments can help > > us make a decision and legal perspectives doesn't always make logical > > sense which many tend to assume. > > In other words, Fedora's lawyers have deemed it risky (or even downright > illegal) to include in the distro .repo files that would allow users to > download, say, US-illegal codecs even if the repository itself > physically and logistically isn't connected to Fedora. But pointers in > documents can. > > There we go. That's what the legal experts are saying. Do I have it > about right? It's called contributory infringement. In the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) defines (active) induced infringement: "Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer." This means, we cannot point to a repo which contains software which infringes upon software patents, or we are just as liable as the people actually infringing the patents. We can't include a repo file, nor can we say "the files are over there". Not in CodecBuddy, not in yum, not in a tree, not with a cat. No. ~spot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
