Re: Legality of Fedora in production environment

[Dmitry Butskoy <buc odusz so-cdu ru>]

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 05:28:45PM +0400, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
>   
> > Randy Wyatt wrote:
> >     
> > > Why wouldn't a hard copy of the GPL suffice ?
> > >       
> > Yep, but GPL is not approrved officially in our (and many other) 
> > countries. I know that some users do notarially certified translation of 
> > GPL, but it costs money too. (Hopefully the ranslation of GPL only is 
> > enough, not BSD, MPL etc.)
> >     
>
> since Russia is a member of the Berne Convention, if I recall well, some 
> lawyer consider that there shouldn't be a need for a translation and
> even that no translation is better.
Yes. It is the reason why hardware "comes back after the 2 week 
checking". Fortunately.
> In any case I am not convinced that this discussion belongs to
> fedora-devel-list, although I am not sure that there exists a list about 
> those kind of issues.
>   
"Fedora-devel" implies not home enthusiasts only. Normally a lot of 
things we use  in some non-home place, and all such places are affected.

Consider the situation: you go to your employer and say "I want to help 
to develop Fedora, let's change our, say RHEL2, server to Fedora 7, I 
can guarantee that I'm skilled enough to support this". What the 
employer shoild answer? "No, I don't want troubles wiith policy, because 
your Fedora is not accompanied with any hard copy legal documents". :(


~buc