legal March 2022

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

15 participants
11 discussions

Re: Package Licensing - Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) License
by Justin Zobel 01 Mar '22

01 Mar '22

Ahh OK. Well, it would make sense to have a combined list. Hopefully, someone on the Fedora side can give me the all OK to include the package based on RHEL's inclusion policy. And I just realised I hit reply instead of reply-all on the email again. On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:55 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com> wrote: > In theory, the Fedora list is the RHEL list, but some time ago Red Hat > started supplementing it internally with another "list" (or compiled > information) resulting from review of results of certain scanning > tools on RHEL package source code. That "list" is not currently public > information. Our current plan is to essentially merge the two license > approval efforts so that there is one single public list of approved > and unapproved licenses. But it will take some time to undertake the > various steps for getting there. > > Richard > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 5:14 PM Justin Zobel <justin.zobel(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Thank you Richard. Is there an "Accepted Licenses" page for RHEL? > > > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:40 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 9:52 PM Justin Zobel <justin.zobel(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Thank you for these insights. Are you able to provide a link to the > RHEL review of ODbL for the Fedora license team to refer to in their review > process? > >> > >> Unfortunately in this case there really isn't anything to link to > >> apart from a snarky comment by me about how lengthy the license is :-) > >> > >> Richard > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 11:52 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:49 PM Justin Zobel <justin.zobel(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > Hi Team, > >> >> > > >> >> > I've just begun packaging for Fedora and of course, I happen to > choose one with a license that needs querying. > >> >> > > >> >> > The Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) is for database > usage in the kpublictransport KDE library. It is used for access to > OpenStreetMap via the KTrip application designed to aid users in navigating > via public transport. > >> >> > > >> >> > From the OpenStreetMap Copyright page on their website: > >> >> > OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under the Open Data Commons > Open Database License (ODbL) by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF). > >> >> > > >> >> > Open Database License: https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ > >> >> > Open Street Map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright > >> >> > KDE Source Repository: > https://invent.kde.org/libraries/kpublictransport/ > >> >> > Fedora Source Repository: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kpublictransport/ > >> >> > > >> >> > I would like to know if this license is acceptable to Fedora. > >> >> > >> >> This is somewhat interesting as it is the first case I can think of > >> >> where a license that Red Hat has specifically reviewed internally for > >> >> inclusion in Red Hat Enterprise Linux has at a later time come up for > >> >> a decision in Fedora. > >> >> > >> >> We actually approved ODBL for RHEL last year, and I think if we had > >> >> our contemplated merging of RHEL license review and Fedora license > >> >> review in place, it would just end up on the "good" list, but given > >> >> that the new process is not yet established it would probably be a > >> >> good idea to do another review now that it has come up for Fedora. > >> >> > >> >> Richard > >> >> > >> > > > -- > >

4 10

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal March 2022