On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 7:42 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > Open Publication License, v1.0 or later - see
> >
http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/
>
> Ignoring the 'or later' issue, this license (SPDX: OPUBL-1.0) is
> generally classified as "not allowed" with a usage note that says
> it is allowed for documentation "if the copyright holder does not
> exercise any of the “LICENSE OPTIONS” listed in Section VI".
>
https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/blob/main/data/OPUB...
> (I think we did it this way because under our new system prohibiting
> it by default while stating an exception was the most convenient way
> to express the policy, which has been in place in Fedora for at least
> ~15 years.)
We stopped building documentation for the coq package because it is
under this license. The LICENSE file says: "Options A and B are *not*
elected." I only see options A and B in Section VI, so that would
fall under this exception, right?
When I visit
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/not-allowed-licenses/
and search for OPUBL-1.0, the usage note you refer to does not appear,
so I was unaware of it. Now that you mention it, I do see it in
data/OPUBL-1.0.toml in the Fedora License Data repository. I just
paged through every license on
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/not-allowed-licenses/ and
no usage notes are displayed for any of them.