Legality of Fedora in production environment

[alan]

On Fri, 11 May 2007, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:

> Simo Sorce wrote:
>> We probably just need a document clearly written, with the right legal
>> words for Russia,
>
> Not for Russia only! In general, such a document could be useful for all 
> supported locales.
>>  where Fedora grants the user the right to use the
>> distribution as a whole on any number of machines, for an unlimited
>> time, and includes grants to install updates _and_ upgrades as well
>> under the same terms.
>> 
>> Have the same document available on a clearly recognizable Fedora domain
>> name, so that you can show the police that it is not a forged document,
>> and on the site only may be have another page with the detailed set of
>> licenses for the picky ones.

Sounds like an interesting graphics arts project.  A do-it-yourself 
official licence kit for free software.  It would need lots of stickers, 
graphics, and the other useless dohickies that come with the "real" 
software licences.  (The image that comes to mind is a long medaeval 
scroll with lots of illumination, wax seals and the like.)

-- 
"ANSI C says access to the padding fields of a struct is undefined.
ANSI C also says that struct assignment is a memcpy. Therefore struct
assignment in ANSI C is a violation of ANSI C..."
                                   - Alan Cox