On May 22, 2015 9:14 PM, "Matthew Miller" <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:05:39PM -0500, kendell clark wrote:
> > discussion of patent encumbered codecs. I'm no lawyer, but what is the
> > legal situation for providing documentation about how to obtain these
> > codecs, rpm fusion, fluendo, etc? I'd prefer rpmfusion only because
> > I've used those codecs for years and they're known stable. And they're
> > free.
> > I could write something up if interested, but I'll wait until I have a
> > decision re legal.
>
> Because I'm not a lawyer either, these questions should probably go to
> legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
We've been asked by legal to remove references to such things and instructions for setting up repos that provide them in the past. The working policy is that Fedora Docs content must be about using software available from Fedora - with reasonable exceptions for using Fedora bits out of context - AMIs, interoperability with other OSs on the same network, etc.
I did ask Legal at one point of it was acceptable to cover non-fedora things - I believe the context at the time was turning off Windows fastboot - and that sort is good, although a peripheral focus. We definitely don't want to instruct on breaching any license or ownership restriction.
--Pete
-- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
