legal April 2018

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

8 participants
6 discussions

Henry Spencer's license
by Petr Šabata 06 Mar '23

06 Mar '23

Dear legal, While checking the contents of our `perl' package, I noticed the following: (...) /* NOTE: this is derived from Henry Spencer's regexp code, and should not * confused with the original package (see point 3 below). Thanks, Henry! */ /* Additional note: this code is very heavily munged from Henry's version * in places. In some spots I've traded clarity for efficiency, so don't * blame Henry for some of the lack of readability. */ /* The names of the functions have been changed from regcomp and * regexec to pregcomp and pregexec in order to avoid conflicts * with the POSIX routines of the same names. */ (...) * pregcomp and pregexec -- regsub and regerror are not used in perl * * Copyright (c) 1986 by University of Toronto. * Written by Henry Spencer. Not derived from licensed software. * * Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any * purpose on any computer system, and to redistribute it freely, * subject to the following restrictions: * * 1. The author is not responsible for the consequences of use of * this software, no matter how awful, even if they arise * from defects in it. * * 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either * by explicit claim or by omission. * * 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not * be misrepresented as being the original software. * **** Alterations to Henry's code are... **** **** Copyright (C) 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, **** 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 **** by Larry Wall and others **** **** You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public **** License or the Artistic License, as specified in the README file. (...) You can see the whole file here: https://metacpan.org/source/SHAY/perl-5.20.1/regexec.c I looked but couldn't find any common name for this license of Henry's. Is it on our list? Is it free? What name should I use in the License tag? Thank you, Petr

5 9

about openssl we may enable and build all elliptic curves on corp ?
by Sérgio Basto 05 Nov '22

05 Nov '22

Hello, I reopen or start thinking again on this question of enable elliptic curves of openssl [1] So going directly to the point, may I built all source of openssl in copr [2] ? or at least some other curves that fedora package don't ship? [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1405843 [2] Version: 1.0.2k %global fips_version 2.0.14 I mean sources: http://ftp.o penssl.org/source/openssl-%{version}.tar.gz and http://ftp.openssl.org/s ource/openssl-fips-%{fips_version}.tar.gz Thanks , -- Sérgio M. B.

4 6

European General Data Protection Regulation
by Pavel Raiskup 23 Apr '18

23 Apr '18

The regulation [1] look like it applies also to US services collecting data of EU citizens. GNU people mentioned [1] as good source for "what has to be done" to comply to the regulation. IANAL, what does this mean for fedoraproject.org, and friends? Do we have to do something? [1] https://www.eugdpr.org/ [2] https://termsfeed.com/blog/gdpr-privacy-policy/ Pavel

2 1

George Douros' fonts can no longer be packaged in Fedora
by Alexander Ploumistos 21 Apr '18

21 Apr '18

Hello, Following this discussion: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/… it was suggested that I alert the good folks on this list. To summarize the situation: a couple of days ago, George Douros updated a number of his fonts and at the same time he placed them under a new, restrictive license (until now, these fonts were in the Public Domain). You can see all that here: http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/ This affects the following packages: gdouros-asea-fonts gdouros-avdira-fonts gdouros-aegean-fonts gdouros-musica-fonts gdouros-aroania-fonts gdouros-symbola-fonts gdouros-textfonts-doc gdouros-aegyptus-fonts gdouros-akkadian-fonts gdouros-analecta-fonts gdouros-alexander-fonts gdouros-anaktoria-fonts The takeaway of a long discussion I had with him is that he does not want to remove the non-commercial clause of his license text (or any of the other restrictions), but at the same time he does not mind us carrying and redistributing the fonts, which is contradictory to say the least. In his last message he said that he would be open to negotiating another license with Fedora. I think I have exhausted any goodwill I might have had with him over the years and I'm not fit to discuss this issue any further with him. If anyone feels this is a goal worth pursuing, that's how things stand at the moment. Best regards Alex

2 2

Questions about some things I'm doing for my SIG
by Abhiram Kuchibhotla 16 Apr '18

16 Apr '18

Good day, everyone. I have a few questions about some things I'm doing for the Fedora Live SIG that I started a week ago. Firstly, are SIGs allowed to have their own branding? The reason I'm asking this is that since this is a very livestream oriented SIG, am I allowed to provide a kit containing stream cards that would be shown from time to time. Another reason I'm asking this is that is it alright for me to use the fedora logo as shown in the image below: [https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/232742985882796032/43428468351854182…] Secondly, what is the policy on domains? Am I allowed to register, say, `fedoralive.streams` and then redirect it back to the SIG wiki page to make it easier to publicize the SIG? Thank you for taking the time to answer this. Regards, Abhiram K ------ My FAS: axeld

3 4

Paintown asssets
by Artur Iwicki 02 Apr '18

02 Apr '18

There is a game package "paintown" [1]; pushed to stable F28, currently in updates-testing for F27 [2]. I installed the game from updates-testing and noticed that the game seems to use copyrighted assets - it features characters from franchises such as Street Fighter, Marvel comics, and Dragon Ball. While I'm not 100% certain if the assets themselves are copyrighted - it's possible they are not ripped from other games, but rather fan-made spritesheets - I'm pretty sure that the use of the characters themselves constitutes as infringement. As such, I think the package should be pulled before it causes us any legal troubles. [1] http://paintown.org/ [2] https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-930a6c068e

3 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal April 2018