Legality of Fedora in production environment

Simo Sorce ssorce at
Fri May 11 13:52:43 UTC 2007

On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 15:29 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 05:28:45PM +0400, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> > Randy Wyatt wrote:
> > >Why wouldn't a hard copy of the GPL suffice ?
> > Yep, but GPL is not approrved officially in our (and many other) 
> > countries. I know that some users do notarially certified translation of 
> > GPL, but it costs money too. (Hopefully the ranslation of GPL only is 
> > enough, not BSD, MPL etc.)
> since Russia is a member of the Berne Convention, if I recall well, some 
> lawyer consider that there shouldn't be a need for a translation and
> even that no translation is better. I know that it depends on the lawyer
> since, in France there is a dispute against those who think that since
> the GPL has some clauses that don't translate easily to french law it is
> not applicable and those who think that under the Bern Convention the
> GPL should be reinterpretated in the context of the French laws.
> In any case I am not convinced that this discussion belongs to
> fedora-devel-list, although I am not sure that there exists a list about 
> those kind of issues.

This is definitively a more general Free Software problem.

The law there is obviously broken but there is nothing you can except
lobbying for amendments in appropriate forums.

Meanwhile I guess the easiest thing you can do is to print the license
agreement shown to you by the fedora installer, in English, and show it
to the authorities.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list