Re: Recent Purge of Content "per Fedora Legal"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 05:10:14AM -0600, Nick Bebout wrote:
> The short version of my answer is that we can not refer in any way to
> rpmfusion and apparently spot just now realized that the F14 musicians
> guide and software management guides did and he wanted it gone ASAP.
> 
Yeah -- because Red Hat can be sued for Contributory Infringement in the
United States, any wording around rpmfusion (and other sources of
patent-encumbered code if references to those exist.) needs to be vetted by
Fedora Legal (spot.  who presumably sends the text to the Red Hat lawyers to
decide if it's okay or not.)   Unreviewed text can get us into legal
trouble.

This is fallout from the fedora advisory board discussion about whether the
new Application Installer can point users at non-free applications.  As part
of that, someone searched our websites to find if we were already pointing
users at non-free applications.  They found this content and pointed it out
to spot who had to remove it to protect us legally.

If you have more questions it's probably best to ask spot as he has more
experience with the legal situation from discussing these issues with the
lawyers for years.

-Toshio


> I will send more info this afternoon when I get off work at $dayjob.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On Jan 23, 2014, at 0:01, Christopher Antila <crantila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA512
> > 
> > Hi:
> > 
> > I'm just wondering what's going on with the recent purge of content "per 
> > Fedora Legal." Why is this happening now? Who is provoking it? Why are there 
> > no entries in the Revision History? What exactly are you trying to remove? 
> > (Because I don't think you're getting all of it in the Musicians' Guide).
> > 
> > I'm in favour of following guidelines from Fedora Legal, but I don't 
> > understand why three-year-old documents are being revised without notice, 
> > explanation, or obvious record, either for guide owners or the community at 
> > large.
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher.
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
> > 
> > iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJS4LBWAAoJEAWCcTQ3FNFMZpQP+wXC4i7qJ4gJVL82FVuuaz2y
> > lBJEpjkxJYy12zPaiIw/pm7/ZbQ+yv+7EKBtozZZmqLho58m5IJst5eSmiyt4wIV
> > tvPZrnX6Zu+tYBPcQx+YSzGW0xz81EH/ZXGxQePkD41u/ZD1g7lVmWBUmbgRnPm4
> > ssz/IWP5Rs+o20Re7cOEztW/xwLcg7lOEdIJibg1BWFbifvZRiGcQhf5YROfMGNO
> > yHijEHYja82LFGmhVLPeKJ4TYo7vbj65JegAfrkEBahzO4ub2FyNyEbgykdNiL8n
> > SUSDYHVxGq+m29upie42G2C+mH4fOlREd9oUPdyBQfrgUMr5NfJdwRa4sWIWAc3I
> > 0MlE7CltE3ks/prRIvikVUxdabT6pPPaP45TmyTzgzutIdCQaLJqtH+pO40dkdyc
> > 8I/6wEb7cOLbpgd7rpXoR3Ruf652C4vHVF0FZP2Dt4VGEH1skvacFau3Q7CeoZz5
> > zanG7rwPWHDamnzKcxwrAm/85gdDXUHu9CD2qTSp5mdxT23W6v7Lz3T9n4y6Pj6t
> > t6kBgxUhiE+K03TCRBTt3gfZvjtGzMGcrSE7yQLri3UNprB1zqiyLCp6wUPa+lo+
> > BeIAXWOAh0wWsq2UhC2zbk1XpYFnsbzUvI7QC7sVR5Ztube80VCeNd1jLweHoL9I
> > wnaPvKtskx/BRU4k/1sV
> > =zi1G
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > 
> -- 
> docs mailing list
> docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs

Attachment: pgppG6j4L4vzp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

-- 
docs mailing list
docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux