License text in binary packages

[Tom 'spot' Callaway]

On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 07:57 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> Then let me put it a bit stronger: I think Red Hat Legal is in error and
> FESCO is not qualified to decide on this (Neither am I).
> 
> Let me ask differently: Is FESCO or RH taking liability on consequences
> of this decision?

In the FESCO meeting (now two weeks past), I discussed the finding of RH
Legal that GPL packages should include the text of the GPL license. I
also stated that I thought it would be prohibitive to send every single
possible license to RH Legal for review. Based on that, I proposed that
all packages include the license text(s) that are relevant to them in %
doc, which has been the policy since the first draft of the
PackagingGuidelines.

This proposal was passed in the meeting.

It is now apparent to me that we require more legal clarification on
specific questions.

I've requested that Red Hat Legal answer the following questions:

1. In the specific case of the GPL, should Fedora Extras be including
the license text as part of the binary package?

2. In the case of all other licenses, should Fedora Extras be including
the license text as part of the binary package?

3. If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then please
explain why Red Hat has not ever required these practices in RHEL or
Fedora Core packages.

4. If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then please advise
us on how we should include license texts for software packages which do
not include the license text with the source distribution. Should these
programs be exempt from such practices, or is it the responsibility of
the packager to include the license text as a second source?

5. Is Red Hat taking legal liability for the consequences of these
practices, including the possibility of mistakenly including a license
text which does not match the upstream source? Or does this liability
fall onto the individual packager?

Hopefully, Red Hat Legal will look at these questions on Tuesday, and
get us some answers as soon as possible. Based on those answers, FESCO
will re-evaluate this policy.

Until then, I ask for everyone's patience, and to try to keep your
flames to a minimum.

~spot
-- 
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!