At which stage in Fedora does upstream code become "Fedora Software"

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

Given that I was redirected to you guys

I'm trying to establish at which stage the upstream code we package is 
transformed into "Fedora Software"

is it at packaging stage
is it at iso stage
does it apply only to the defaults
does it take any rights away from the owner doing so
is it when we ( the community ) apply patches to it
etc..

JBG

[Richard Fontana]

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:21:08PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>  Given that I was redirected to you guys
>  
>  I'm trying to establish at which stage the upstream code we package
>  is transformed into "Fedora Software" 
"Fedora Software" for purposes of what? I'm not sure I understand the
question.

>  is it at packaging stage
>  is it at iso stage
>  does it apply only to the defaults
>  does it take any rights away from the owner doing so
>  is it when we ( the community ) apply patches to it 
Clearly once some software is not identical to its form upstream, it
is distinguishable from upstream. I suppose you could say that it's
"part of Fedora" (for some definitions of Fedora at least) at that
point, but I'm not sure if that's what you're asking.

Regarding specifically the question "does it take any rights away from
the owner doing so", by "owner" you mean the owner of the upstream
code?

See the "Non-Goals" paragraph of:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement#...


 - RF

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 09/27/2013 12:52 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
>  On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:21:08PM +0000, "Jóhann B.
> Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > Given that I was redirected to you guys
> >
> > I'm trying to establish at which stage the upstream code we package
> > is transformed into "Fedora Software"
>  "Fedora Software" for purposes of what? I'm not sure I understand the
>  question. 
We have an legal clause that says "Fedora software and technical 
information may be subject to the U.S. Export Administration 
Regulations" in relation to the EAR
( Let's not start beating the dead horse of distribution of fedoram 
forking Fedora etc just because I mention EAR)

If I was going host my code in the US somewhere and make that code 
public under shareable licence does an EAR act automatically apply to 
that code?

Because at some point the upstream code we built the distribution upon, 
is considered "Fedora software" under US laws and what I'm trying to 
understand and establish at which point does that happen in our processes.

Is it as soon as we download/clone the upstream code?
Is it when we start distributing those bit ( which makes as soon as we 
build an rpm ) ?
Is it when we apply patch to the upstream code here downstream here with 
us ( which modifies the upstream code ) and then start distributing it?
Is this clause only applicable to the code we write ourselves downstream 
here with us, as in something that apply's strictly to Fedora which for 
example might be hosted under fedorahosted?
Does that clause apply to code hosted under fedorahosted even if it's 
being used outside Fedora?

JBG

[Richard Fontana]

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 01:56:58PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>  If I was going host my code in the US somewhere and make that code
>  public under shareable licence does an EAR act automatically apply
>  to that code? 
You should consult your own lawyer for advice on such a question.

 - RF

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 09/27/2013 02:07 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
>  On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 01:56:58PM +0000, "Jóhann B.
> Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > If I was going host my code in the US somewhere and make that code
> > public under shareable licence does an EAR act automatically apply
> > to that code?
>  You should consult your own lawyer for advice on such a question. 
The only reason I threw this in there was to be able to determine if EAR 
applies to all codes hosted and distributed in the US as in code outside 
the "Fedora trademark" and Red Hat, which would then be applicable not 
only to fedorahosted ( which might have been a gray area ) but for 
example github inc  (which if I'm not mistaken is US based company as 
well. )

But you should be able to provide me with answer to the other questions.

JBG