[Fedora-legal-list] Re: Legal Problem: md5 implementation

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 18.09.2007 19:44, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa at redhat.com> writes:
> 
>>> It should be enough to remove this license text (which is allowed since
>>> 2000) to make it GPL compatible.  Or, to make it legally perfect, remove
>>> the old code, take recent version of RFC 1321, copy reference code from
>>> it and remove the license text.
>> Only RSA can remove the license text,
> no; everybody can remove it because you can do everything what you want
> to do with the code since 2000.
> 
>> The license text in the code itself trumps all.
> Why? The text was written 1992 which was before the dual licensing to
> public domain in 2000.
> [...]

I like to let you two fight this out. But is there a real reasons to
continue this in private? I'd say it's time to move it to fedora-devel,
where everyone can participate. Maybe someone comes up with a
explanation we all don't know about yet? Did the debian guys never
discuss this earlier?

On 18.09.2007 15:31, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 09:02 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> > My package mail-notification is GPL and uses it. :-/
>> > But why are "*we* going to need to replace it"? Is the issue that urgent
>> > so there is not even 24 or 72 hours to talk to upstream to make them
>> > aware of the issue first? Then maybe upstream can fix it quickly once
>> > and for all and for all distributions? Or are we not allowed to talk
>> > about this in public bug trackers?
> No, the issue is not that urgent.

Thx for clarifying. It sounded a bit to me like this had to happen fast
and silent.

> We (Fedora) need to take action to remedy this.

Sure and np.

> This could be in the form of writing a patch and submitting
> it upstream for review, or simply pointing to upstream and having them
> resolve it, then taking in the same changes in Fedora.

Sure -- but my upstream in this case is a bit problematic in general
already, thus I'd like to safe your and my time and discuss it first
with upstream to agree on a proper solution before working one out and
throwing it away.

> [...]

Cu
knurd