Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Kevin Kofler]

Alexandre Oliva <aoliva <at> redhat.com> writes:
> If you find any such problems in BLAG 80000 (never formally released)
> or BLAG 90000 (released easier today), please report them.

Here's some I found at a quick glance:

http://www.blagblagblag.org/90000/BLAG/RPMS.fedora/zd1211-firmware-1.4-1.noarch.rpm
Yes, it says it's GPLv2. Now try looking at the "source code"... See also the 
Fedora review request (where I raised that point, wondering if this is legal to 
redistribute at all):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=221675#c17

http://www.blagblagblag.org/90000/BLAG/RPMS.fedora/midisport-firmware-1.2-1.noarch.rpm
Claims to be GPLv2, but only the firmware loader is GPLv2 (actually dual GPLv2 
or BSD). The package also contains firmware files (in /lib/firmware) under the 
following license:
> The firmware files (*.ihx) are copyrighted by Midiman, and can be used
> and redistributed only as part of this package.
See:
http://usb-midi-fw.cvs.sourceforge.net/usb-midi-fw/midisport-firmware/LICENSE?revision=1.1&view=markup

http://www.blagblagblag.org/90000/BLAG/RPMS.kriehn/pdftk-1.41-5.fc9.i386.rpm
pdftk was dropped from Fedora for licensing reasons:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=236310
The files have since been fixed not to claim to be "confidential and 
proprietary", but the new license is still not acceptable because it forbids 
use in a nuclear facility. If this is not Free enough for Fedora, how come it 
is Free enough for BLAG?

http://www.blagblagblag.org/90000/BLAG/RPMS.kriehn/msttcore-fonts-2.0-3.fc9.prof_k.noarch.rpm
Kept the best one for the end. Does this really need a comment?

        Kevin Kofler