I read the Fedora Myths page today and thought the legal issues entry was a bit on the conservative side. I'd like to see it be a little more explicit about the situation: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraMyths#head-37a0662e90f2aaad2607986eb8fad7b80da09982 I would like to change this paragraph: For example, Fedora includes several media players that support a wide range of formats, but not does not supply plug-ins for media formats that are restricted by patent licenses or legislation. To this: For example, Fedora includes several media players that support a wide range of free and open formats but none that depend on formats that are restricted by patent licenses or legislation. The Fedora project realizes that many of our users are legally allowed to use these proprietary codecs so we package media players that are extensible via plugins. This allows third parties that are legally allowed to distribute the codecs to make them available as plugin packages that will work with our media players. Does this cross the line to contributory infringement? It doesn't mention any specific places a person can download from. It covers users granted licenses by the owning companies as well as users in countries where the patents are not valid. It doesn't encourage anyone to do anything that is illegal; only points out that plugin packages are available on the internet for those who have a right to use them. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
