Wording of Legal Issues myth
Toshio Kuratomi
toshio at tiki-lounge.com
Sat Aug 20 18:07:33 UTC 2005
I read the Fedora Myths page today and thought the legal issues entry
was a bit on the conservative side. I'd like to see it be a little more
explicit about the situation:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraMyths#head-37a0662e90f2aaad2607986eb8fad7b80da09982
I would like to change this paragraph:
For example, Fedora includes several media players that support a wide
range of formats, but not does not supply plug-ins for media formats
that are restricted by patent licenses or legislation.
To this:
For example, Fedora includes several media players that support a
wide range of free and open formats but none that depend on formats
that are restricted by patent licenses or legislation. The Fedora
project realizes that many of our users are legally allowed to use
these proprietary codecs so we package media players that are
extensible via plugins. This allows third parties that are legally
allowed to distribute the codecs to make them available as plugin
packages that will work with our media players.
Does this cross the line to contributory infringement? It doesn't
mention any specific places a person can download from. It covers users
granted licenses by the owning companies as well as users in countries
where the patents are not valid. It doesn't encourage anyone to do
anything that is illegal; only points out that plugin packages are
available on the internet for those who have a right to use them.
-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/marketing/attachments/20050820/d93d3d6e/attachment.bin
More information about the marketing
mailing list