legal June 2019

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
3 discussions

Regarding GPL compatibility of fdk-aac
by Tom Callaway 11 Jun '19

11 Jun '19

The Fedora Project is aware that the Free Software Foundation has stated that the Fraunhofer FDK AAC license is GPL incompatible, specifically, because of Clause 3. We believe that the fdk-aac software codec implementation that we wish to include in Fedora is no longer encumbered by AAC patents. This fact means that Clause 3 in the FDK AAC license is a "no op", or to put it plainly, if no patents are in play, there are no patent licenses to disclaim. For this (and only this) specific implementation of fdk-aac, we believe that the FDK AAC license is GPL compatible. Thanks, Tom

1 0

Adding openhantek to fedora repo
by Vascom 04 Jun '19

04 Jun '19

Hi. It is my second attempt to add openhantek software to Fedora repo. First variant contain nonfree firmware and was added to rpmfusion nonfree. Now all nonfree firmware was removed by upstream and project use only GPL firmware. More information here https://github.com/OpenHantek/openhantek/issues/240#issuecomment-494361989 My Review Request https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1713232 Please clarify may I add this to Fedora now or not. -- Best Regards, Vasiliy Glazov FAS: vascom

3 4

License mix of package "anki"
by Christian Krause 03 Jun '19

03 Jun '19

Hi, I'm currently in the process of updating the package anki to a new major release for which I need guidance regarding the mix of licensing. Originally I was setting the bug report for the new release ([1]) to block FE-Legal in order to get confirmation that my findings regarding the licenses are OK and acceptable for Fedora. Since I haven't received any feedback for a while, that was probably not the best way to reach the FE-Legal team and so I'll repeat my question here: --------------------------------------------------------------- The new major version of anki 2.1.x includes some new files with new licenses. Upstream has updated the LICENSE file(s) accordingly. IMHO this would result in the following License tag in the spec file: License: AGPLv3+ and GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and MIT and BSD and ASL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA and CC-BY Please can FE-Legal confirm, that this combination of licenses is OK? As reference, here are the relevant snippets of the two license files: 1. LICENSE [...] The following included source code items use a license other than AGPL3: * Anki's translations: BSD. * Qt's bundled translations: LGPL3. * The anki/template/ folder is based off pystache: MIT. * The SuperMemo importer: GPL3. * The Pauker importer: BSD-3. * mpv.py: MIT. * statsbg.py: CC BY-SA 3.0. * winpaths.py: MIT. * MathJax: Apache 2. * jQuery and jQuery-UI: MIT. * browsersel.js: CC BY 2.5. * plot.js: MIT. [...] 2. LICENSE.logo: [...] Anki's logo is copyright Alex Fraser, and is licensed under the AGPL3 like the [...] The official source of the tarball which includes the complete license files can be found here: https://apps.ankiweb.net/downloads/current/anki-2.1.12-source.tgz --------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you very much in advance! Best regards, Christian [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1612847

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal June 2019