Legality of Fedora in production environment
buc at odusz.so-cdu.ru
Fri May 11 14:03:32 UTC 2007
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.
Yes. It is the reason why hardware "comes back after the 2 week
> 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.
"Fedora-devel" implies not home enthusiasts only. Normally a lot of
things we use in some non-home place, and all such places are affected.
Consider the situation: you go to your employer and say "I want to help
to develop Fedora, let's change our, say RHEL2, server to Fedora 7, I
can guarantee that I'm skilled enough to support this". What the
employer shoild answer? "No, I don't want troubles wiith policy, because
your Fedora is not accompanied with any hard copy legal documents". :(
More information about the fedora-devel-list