Fedora spin from RpmFusion
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
johannbg at hi.is
Fri Sep 28 23:16:52 UTC 2007
> Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> (The following really has been asked and answered in numerous times
>> Things settled once and for all..
>> With those word said. Is it an official statement from Red Hat/Fedora
>> that proper media suppport and an option that could allow user to do so
>> during install anaconda/firstboot ( disclaimer/user takes responsibility
>> rpmfusion or other 3rd party repo setup for user and user can chose to
>> install "questionable software" packages from there) inclusion or an
>> for an user to setup, install or othewize an 3 party repository during
>> installation that may contain questionable" software will never make it
>> into Fedora/Red Hat unless changes in ( US )laws are made.
Can I assume that the same thing applies for CD's that would contain
*extra packages* and respins?
>> ( And doesn't Red Hat/Fedora have to blacklist or prevent during
>> installation that the name and paths of known 3 party repostory's
>> from legal perspective otherwise they can be held countable? )
> They won't be. The whole point of contributory infringement is that you
> are contributing to it. Allowing something is different from aiding it.
>> Leaving users and developers with these 3 options..
>> A. An addon cd that includes the prober media package.
>> Users are left with the option to find and download an
>> cd that contains the questionable software and can install from/off
>> B. User have to install/setup the 3 party respository after initial
> Anaconda has the ability to install software off a repository during
> installation time from Fedora Core 6 onwards.
Somehow I totally missed that, any docs about this I can be redirected to
So I can see test and try on noob user to do so,
so I see how viable solution it is. we are talking about the first
installation scene not after you reboot and go to "first boot" where you
can do some additional things? Had noticed you could install extra
packages setup repos and that from there..
>> C. An respin with no affiliation with Red Hat/Fedora is made that
>> the "questionable packages and repos" and the user does not have to
>> do any work from his half ( work out of the box solution )
> If this is done, it should be rebranded and not called Fedora.
Yes that has already been established many times.. ( and work being
developed respins tools that will easy the work in doing so) .
And also how many letters from Fedora name have to be remove so the naming
is neutralized ( fedorians, eudora etc... )
>> Software that is/has been developed that can be misused to break "laws"
>> tho it's initial creation and function of the software was never
>> to do so will never be included in Red Hat/Fedora
>> ( Even tho that package is gpl and source is made publicly available )
>> made available, in Red Hat/Fedora
>> Just so things can be settled..
> If the software is infringing patents, it cannot be included regardless
> of it's copyright license.
And in the scenario where software is created and a year later less/more
something is patent hence the software now breaks the patent what then?
who's in right here the software or the patent?
And if the source of the code is made available could not the patent holders
read the source and close "infringing" part in their code that is if we
are talking about code and it can be patent ( Yes my knowledge in this are
equals to 0 or less, ignorance shining through :) some how my internal
logic had made the assumption the same thing as in the rules and
regulations that protect writers and their written work would apply to
coders and their coded work as well ?
More information about the fedora-devel-list