[Fedora-legal-list] Status of ICQ-related apps in Fedora.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 5 May 2010, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
It seems, that *all* 3rd party software, which is should connect to
ICQ networks for normal operation, violates their EULA (or urges users
to violate EULA).
...
Any opinions?
more a matter of 'politics', rather than legal
This is a slippery slope. Fedora has no mandate to be a
private contractual analysis or enforcement venue (I think
...)
'vetting' software license terms for freedom is one thing;
avoiding affirmative legal (of matters of governmentally
promulgated law) prohibitions ... here, patent, trademark,
copyright
I am not aware of a general governmentally imposed legal duty
to ** not ** publish software that MIGHT be use to act in a
way a matter of 'private law' [here: a contract]
One cannot know all laws of all jurisdictions of the world.
Red Hat as the owner of the Fedora project ultimately will
override any call that might get it subject to liability
within the jurisdictions it operates. (one assumes ...)
Even more tellingly, one cannot begin know all possible
contracts purporting to govern or impair actions by third
parties. To try to do so leads to 'analysis paralysis' and
simply never doing anything. The prior para. as to Red Hat's
ability to protect itself and its actions applies here as well
If a person signing the Fedora CLA is uncomfortable
proceeding, they need to opt of participating
But really, a lay person has to decide for themself, possibly
with the advice of counsel.
This venue, it seems to me, has to not open up the infinite
alleys of playing lawyer and 'enforcing' private contract
pairings beyond statutory prohibition or 'tortious' [asserted
wrongful acts, not arising our of contract] conduct.
- ---------------start disclaimer-------------------
I_A_AL, but not your lawyer. I offer legal advice and formal
opinion only within the confines of a previously established
and explicit attorney-client relationship where privilege may
be had; and NEVER on a public list server.
- ----------------end disclaimers ------------------
As I say, a slippery slope, and a personal actions
('body politic') question rather than a 'fedora-legal' one (I
think)
- -- Russ herrold
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFL4XbkMRh1QZtklkQRAs0YAKChMXptTO3/688GXYx7AXF76x2RsgCdHj8l
9H24YHssfzdzSK2maluN6vo=
=2x7Q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----