Legal Update

[Paul W. Frields]

On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 20:23 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Paul W. Frields wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Sorry if I was unclear.  My point was that trying to walk this
> > particular legal line -- a very fine one at that -- is making the value
> > of our possibly-soon-to-be-published verbiage practically nil. 
> 
> Are you considering the entire workflow?
> 
> 1) Click on a MPEG file
> 2) A dialog explains why we support open non-patent encumbered formats
> 3) Another dialog which offers the Fluendo codecs/ "Click here for 
> alternatives"
> 4) User chooses to click on alternatives link
> 5) Gets directed to Fedora wiki page which has a link to RPM Fusion 
> website or a repo file or package (Which spot has confirmed recently 
> that Legal is ok with)
> 6) Installs software with a single click via Pirut
> 
> How is this not an advantage over the current situation?

I understand this workflow fine, but "Joe User" has no way of figuring
out which package is the one to install for <encumbered_codec> once he
has his repo configured, meaning our links haven't helped him.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
           Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20071119/31b0ef20/attachment.sig>