On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 12:00 -0600, Richi Plana wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 21:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I am not talking about any repo files. Just a pointer in documentation or in any application. The details are explained in FAB list. That requires Legal to look into this. No amount of layman arguments can help us make a decision and legal perspectives doesn't always make logical sense which many tend to assume.
In other words, Fedora's lawyers have deemed it risky (or even downright illegal) to include in the distro .repo files that would allow users to download, say, US-illegal codecs even if the repository itself physically and logistically isn't connected to Fedora. But pointers in documents can.
There we go. That's what the legal experts are saying. Do I have it about right?
It's called contributory infringement.
In the United States, 35 U.S.C. ยง 271(b) defines (active) induced infringement: "Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer."
This means, we cannot point to a repo which contains software which infringes upon software patents, or we are just as liable as the people actually infringing the patents. We can't include a repo file, nor can we say "the files are over there".
Not in CodecBuddy, not in yum, not in a tree, not with a cat.
No.
~spot