Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499875 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-29 15:29:39 EDT --- So the only thing we really care about is the actual license on the code itself. Statements on the web site are only used as a last resort, and only if they're not contradictory (which they are) and we're reasonably sure they were made by the authors of the code in question. The code itself (http://code.google.com/p/libdasm/source/browse/trunk/libdasm.c) still has a copyright notice with no rights grant. Without that, we have no rights modify, redistribute or even make use of that code. It is not remotely free. If they want to relicense, they just need to include one of the many standard license blocks at the top of the .c and .h files, add a copy of the full license file to their repository, fix the README.txt file to not say "public domain" and preferably fix up the conflicting statements on their web site. Or they could remove the copyright notices and properly disclaim copyright as spot indicated above, assuming that they have the legal right to do so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review