Re: [Fedora-legal-list] CAcert.org license
by Tom Callaway
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 23:03 +0100, Matthias Saou wrote:
> > >>>>> "TC" == Tom \"spot\" Callaway <Tom> writes:
> >
> > TC> Given that it does not give permission for us to redistribute (the
> > TC> cornerstone requirement for Content licenses), this license is not
> > TC> acceptable for Fedora.
> >
> > I guess I'm glad I looked before approving the package, but I have to
> > wonder: Do the cacert folks actually want anyone to use their
> > certificates? I mean, this prevents basically everyone from using
> > them, because they can't come with the OS or the browser.
>
> Personally, the more I read the document, the more I'm confused.
>
> "You may NOT distribute certificates or root keys under this
> licence"... does this mean we can distribute under a different license?
Well, sortof. The wording here is strange because you can get a
different license from the CA issuer. We can't just pick a license, but
the CA issuer might be willing to give us a different one.
> Would it be worth getting in contact with CAcert.org in order to try
> and have them allow us to redistribute the root certs under conditions
> which are acceptable to the Fedora Project?
Probably, yes. :)
~spot
8 years, 2 months
[Fwd: [Fedora-legal-list] Trademark - FEDORA]
by Pam Chestek
I'll handle.
Pam
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fedora-legal-list] Trademark - FEDORA
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:00:53 -0300
From: Kris Williamson (KRW) <krw(a)aribonifabbri.com.br>
To: <fedora-legal-list(a)redhat.com>
I am a trademark attorney working in Brazil. I have come across a
company which has applied to register the trademark FEDORA in Brazil for
services in Class 35. I want to know if this third party has permission
to do so. Who do I contact regarding this?
Kris Williamson
Advocacia Pietro Ariboni
Ariboni, Fabbri, Schmidt & Advogados Associados
Rua Guararapes, 1909 -10º andar
Brooklin Novo
São Paulo - SP
Tel: (11) 5502-1222
Fax (11) 5505-3306
E-mail: krw(a)aribonifabbri.com.br <mailto:krw@aribonifabbri.com.br>
aribonifabbri(a)ariboni.com.br
<mailto:aribonifabbri@ariboni.com.br>
_______________________________________________
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
14 years, 11 months
Trademark - FEDORA
by Kris Williamson (KRW)
I am a trademark attorney working in Brazil. I have come across a company which has applied to register the trademark FEDORA in Brazil for services in Class 35. I want to know if this third party has permission to do so. Who do I contact regarding this?
Kris Williamson
Advocacia Pietro Ariboni
Ariboni, Fabbri, Schmidt & Advogados Associados
Rua Guararapes, 1909 -10º andar
Brooklin Novo
São Paulo - SP
Tel: (11) 5502-1222
Fax (11) 5505-3306
E-mail: krw(a)aribonifabbri.com.br
aribonifabbri(a)ariboni.com.br
14 years, 11 months
NIST "license"
by Jerry James
Re: the recent speech recognition thread on Fedora-devel, I am looking
at packaging up a few tools from http://www.nist.gov/speech/tools/,
SPHERE in particular. However, the distribution contains no mention
of a license. A query about this was answered with a pointer to this
page:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/disclaim.htm
which says, "These World Wide Web pages are provided as a public
service by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
With the exception of material marked as copyrighted, information
presented on these pages is considered public information and may be
distributed or copied. Use of appropriate byline/photo/image credits
is requested."
The SPHERE source distribution contains a directory, src/lib/sp, which
does contain code with copyright and license statements. However,
this is code that was written outside of NIST and appears to be
released under a variety of open source licenses. I will do a
thorough audit of that directory before proceeding. Assuming that
audit turns up no problems, what do you think of NIST's statement
above? Since the code they wrote contains no copyright statements,
are they declaring it public domain? I can ask for more information
if necessary, but I'd appreciate a hand with crafting the questions if
so.
I hope this doesn't turn into the conversation I had with a prominent
computer scientist a couple of years ago. He distributes some
excellent software with no clear license. We had a conversation that
went something like this.
Me: "Under what license are you distributing this software?"
Him: "Argh! I hate it when people ask me that! I'm just doing
research and making the results of my research available to the
public!"
Me: "Yes, but the public doesn't know what they are allowed to do with
your software. That's what the license spells out."
Him: "They can do whatever they want with it. That's why I put it on
a web page!"
Me: "Great, would you mind just writing that in a license file and
including it with the software?"
Him: "I haven't got time for this nonsense. If you find the software
useful, then use it. If not, don't use it!"
[Conversation then goes in circles for the next 5 minutes until me gives up.]
--
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/
http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/
15 years
modified MIT license in GPLv3+ source
by Christian Krause
Hi,
I'm currently packaging the tool "pianobooster":
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494965 and I've discovered
the following problem:
The source (GPLv3+) contains 3 files ("rtmidi/*") which are licensed
under a modified MIT license. In general this should be ok, but this
license contains the statement that modifications must be sent back to
the author. For the full license text from the source files see below.
I've set the FE-LEGAL block for the review request (BZ #494965)
Please can the legal team have a look at the problem (and hopefully
remove the FE-LEGAL block)? ;-)
If there's no problem, what would be the correct License tag in the spec
file? GPLv3+ and MIT?
Thanks!
Best regards,
Christian
Here is the problematic license:
RtMidi WWW site: http://music.mcgill.ca/~gary/rtmidi/
RtMidi: realtime MIDI i/o C++ classes
Copyright (c) 2003-2009 Gary P. Scavone
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files
(the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction,
including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge,
publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software,
and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so,
subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
Any person wishing to distribute modifications to the Software is
requested to send the modifications to the original developer so that
they can be incorporated into the canonical version.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR
ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF
CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION
WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
15 years
CDF license
by Jussi Lehtola
Hi,
I'm packaging TeLa, which requires the NASA CDF library.
http://cdf.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Review request is at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494520
The copyright is as follows:
Copyright 2008
Space Physics Data Facility
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
This software may be copied or redistributed as long as it is not sold
for profit, but it can be incorporated into any other substantive
product with or without modifications for profit or non-profit. If the
software is modified, it must include the following notices:
- The software is not the original (for protectiion of the original
author's reputations from any problems introduced by others)
- Change history (e.g. date, functionality, etc.)
This copyright notice must be reproduced on each copy made. This
software is provided as is without any express or implied warranties
whatsoever.
**
Is the license acceptable for inclusion?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org
15 years
