Giulio Fidente wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Jon Stanley wrote:
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@fedoraproject.org wrote:
There is no need to translate. Refer http://www.linux-xp.com/. I haven't looked for source code.
Interesting. I tried the "Buy Now" and "Download Now" links on the English version of the site and got nowhere. I do notice mention that I have to register in order to use the product beyond a 30-day evaluation period. I *think* that this may be an issue under GPLv3 section 6, if there is any GPLv3 software in the distro, which cannot obviously be determined without a copy of it.
This is a Russian organization. I doubt we want to waste money trying to get a hold of this product to hunt down whether the restrictions on the end product is evasive of any specific license within. Wikipedia article states that they do not respond to email. It doesn't appear to have made any new releases and seems to be dead.
btw it is availabe for download at:
ftp://downloads.linux-xp.com/pub/linux-xp/desktop/2008/international/LXPD-2008-I-INTERNATIONAL-862-i386-DVD.iso
and or
ftp://downloads.linux-xp.com/pub/linux-xp/desktop/2008/international/LXPD-2008-I-INTERNATIONAL-862-i386-DVD.iso.torrent
CC'ing fedora-legal list.
Rahul
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 20:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
CC'ing fedora-legal list.
Well, that's an awful lot of content without much context. Care to explain what the legal concern is?
Linux-XP is a Fedora derived distribution and we got a mail to the webmaster's id (fedora-websites list) that this distribution is violating the GPL license by not distributing source code.
Rahul
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 20:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
CC'ing fedora-legal list.
Well, that's an awful lot of content without much context. Care to explain what the legal concern is?
Linux-XP is a Fedora derived distribution and we got a mail to the webmaster's id (fedora-websites list) that this distribution is violating the GPL license by not distributing source code.
exploring the ftp I found this:
ftp://downloads.linux-xp.com/pub/sources_and_patches/SRPMS/
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 17:30 +0200, Giulio Fidente wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 20:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
CC'ing fedora-legal list.
Well, that's an awful lot of content without much context. Care to explain what the legal concern is?
Linux-XP is a Fedora derived distribution and we got a mail to the webmaster's id (fedora-websites list) that this distribution is violating the GPL license by not distributing source code.
exploring the ftp I found this:
ftp://downloads.linux-xp.com/pub/sources_and_patches/SRPMS/
Looks like they're distributing some source code. Are there specific areas of concern?
~spot
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 17:30 +0200, Giulio Fidente wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 20:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
CC'ing fedora-legal list.
Well, that's an awful lot of content without much context. Care to explain what the legal concern is?
Linux-XP is a Fedora derived distribution and we got a mail to the webmaster's id (fedora-websites list) that this distribution is violating the GPL license by not distributing source code.
exploring the ftp I found this:
ftp://downloads.linux-xp.com/pub/sources_and_patches/SRPMS/
Looks like they're distributing some source code. Are there specific areas of concern?
We can ask the original poster (CC'ed). The threads starts at
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/2008-October/msg00044.h...
Rahul
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Tom spot Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
Looks like they're distributing some source code. Are there specific areas of concern?
According to the website, the software requires activation and payment to use it beyond 30 days. My main concern was that this *may* run afoul of section 6 of GPLv3 if there's any GPLv3 licensed software in there, but IANAL and that language is sort of murky to me.
Other than that, I'm not sure that there's any real concern. I'm downloading a copy of the software now to check for de-branding issues, etc. Will report back with findings.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:49:07PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Tom spot Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
Looks like they're distributing some source code. Are there specific areas of concern?
According to the website, the software requires activation and payment to use it beyond 30 days. My main concern was that this *may* run afoul of section 6 of GPLv3 if there's any GPLv3 licensed software in there, but IANAL and that language is sort of murky to me.
And why is that Fedora's concern? That would be linux-xp's violation, no?
josh
Josh Boyer wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:49:07PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Tom spot Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
Looks like they're distributing some source code. Are there specific areas of concern?
According to the website, the software requires activation and payment to use it beyond 30 days. My main concern was that this *may* run afoul of section 6 of GPLv3 if there's any GPLv3 licensed software in there, but IANAL and that language is sort of murky to me.
And why is that Fedora's concern? That would be linux-xp's violation, no?
If a derivative distribution is violating the licenses collectively, it is also misusing the work done within Fedora. That should make it our concern as well, I would think.
Rahul
-
Giulio Fidente -
Jon Stanley -
Josh Boyer -
Rahul Sundaram -
Tom Callaway