[FAmSCo] [Fwd] Possible Red Hat coursework (in PDF) format being posted by a Fedora Ambassador

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 08:24:34PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 07:09:35PM +0200, Joerg Simon wrote:
> >> Am 04.08.2010 13:36, schrieb susmit shannigrahi:
> >> > Were not we talking about ambassadors conduct for sometime?
> >>
> >>
> >> i think - if Ambassadors do mistakes - even if they claim to have not
> >> the Fedora Ambassador Hat on as example - a private mail about the issue
> >> should be send to the person. Because Ambassadors stay in public - they
> >> are the face of Fedora!
> >>
> >> Besides all the legal things i would consider RH Course Material
> >> provided by an Ambassador an forbidden item even if it not listed
> >> exactly by that name.
> >
> > Joerg, you and Susmit made good points.  I didn't fully address them
> > in my earlier reply.  What I meant to say, and didn't do very well,
> > was this:
> >
> > * We don't want any contributors to put inappropriate material on
> >  Planet Fedora.  That includes copyrighted material the contributor
> >  is not permitted to distribute.
> >
> > * The FAmSCo should certainly be concerned with the conduct of
> >  Ambassadors.  I didn't mean to imply in any way that FAmSCo
> >  shouldn't care about these issues.  The Ambassador community has a
> >  FAmSCo precisely *because* they trust you to lead in these areas, I
> >  trust you too, and I'm sure the new FPL feels the same.
> >
> > * All Fedora contributors realize that Red Hat is a sponsor of our
> >  project and does a lot for us in terms of money, people, etc.  So it
> >  seems particularly awkward when a Fedora person visibly violates a
> >  Red Hat copyright.  This is especially true in the case of Red Hat's
> >  training materials, because *on every page* they have a notice that
> >  copying is strictly prohibited.
> >
> > * It's Red Hat's job to police its copyright, and not Fedora's.  I
> >  wouldn't want anyone to mistakenly think that the purpose of Fedora
> >  Ambassadors is only to look after Red Hat's interests.  Sure, we all
> >  know this is not the case.  But someone who has made an error like
> >  this one might make that mistake too.  So (speaking for myself as
> >  *former* FPL) I'd rather let Red Hat deal with those problems.
> >
> > I hope that by explaining I haven't blown this up into a huge issue,
> > when it's just one person's mistake.  Does this explanation make
> > sense?
> >
> 
> 
> I don't think this has or will blow up into a huge issue, at least
> from FAmSCo's standpoint.
> It might be worthwhile for us to find out this person's mentor (if
> they have one) and suggest they have a talk about understanding
> copyright (regardless of the holder), which even for libre software is
> vitally important.

Agreed -- are you offering to look for that person?

> This is an odd case in that our primary sponsor happens to be the
> entity whose copyright was ignored, but I'd hope FAmSCo, take the same
> position if it was Acme Corp. or any other person/company.

I feel the same way -- again, FWIW.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
          Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com