[Fedora-legal-list] [Fwd: Re: [publican-list] [Fwd: Re: r1722 - in trunk/publican-fedora: . .tx]]

[Nick Bebout]

Rudi suggested I forward this to the legal list instead of just to spot.

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [publican-list] [Fwd: Re: r1722 - in
trunk/publican-fedora: . .tx]]
From:    "Nick Bebout" <nb at fedoraproject.org>
Date:    Tue, February 22, 2011 5:37 pm
To:      spot at fedoraproject.org
Cc:      rlandmann at fedoraproject.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom,

Your thoughts on creating our own publican and publican-fedora repos?
Feel free to respond either to me or to publican-list at redhat.com (although
that list does require subscribing first).

Nick

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: [publican-list] [Fwd: Re: r1722 - in trunk/publican-fedora: .
.tx]
From:    "Nick Bebout" <nb at fedoraproject.org>
Date:    Tue, February 22, 2011 5:29 pm
To:      jfearn at redhat.com
         "Publican discussions" <publican-list at redhat.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please inform me what part of http://www.transifex.net/about/terms/ grants
them any more rights than the normal publican license at
http://svn.fedorahosted.org/svn/publican/trunk/publican/LICENSE does.

"By submitting public (non-private) Content to Indifex for inclusion on
your Website, you grant Indifex a world-wide, royalty-free, and
non-exclusive license to reproduce, modify, adapt and publish the Content
solely for the purpose of displaying and promoting your account or
project."

I believe that per the publican license those rights are granted to
everyone by the GPLv2+ which publican is licensed under.

Also, what prevents someone from creating a separate repo to use for
keeping the fedora.transifex.net translations in?

Nick

> On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 16:11 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 16:00, Jeff Fearn <jfearn at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> If there are legal concerns about this please bring them up with
>> Fedora Legal.
>> >
>> > Publican is not a Fedora project and Fedora Legal does not represents
>> > Publican or advocate for it. It most certainly has no stake in any
>> > commercial relationships Publican enters in to.
>>
>> I guess we will go to the next level.
>>
>> If you have a problem, then please have Red Hat legal contact Fedora
>> legal. I hear they work really near each other.
>
> Regardless of what legal advice we get or who we get it from, it is
> completely inappropriate for Fedora to make those decisions or create
> those commercial relationships.
>
> Cheers, Jeff.
>
> _______________________________________________
> publican-list mailing list
> publican-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list
> Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican
>


_______________________________________________
publican-list mailing list
publican-list at redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/publican-list
Wiki: https://fedorahosted.org/publican