permission to use spec files in other projects

[Karsten Wade]

On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 09:42 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:

> I don't think that the Fedora Board (or FESCo) can supercede the CLA,
> which states that original contributions without prior license are
> covered under the CLA. This is because the CLA is a signed agreement
> explicitly to cover this case.

+1

Since the topic under question is clearly covered by the CLA, any other
statement that stands alone or interprets the CLA for the general public
would be like the Board/FESCo giving legal advice.

If someone doesn't feel that the CLA covers their spec file needs, they
need to hire their own attorney for legal advice.

What we could consider is making the CLA much more prominent, pointing
to it as the mortar that holds Fedora together.  Let people then go
figure out for themselves how that CLA applies to their own legal and
contributory questions.

After last year's FUDCon, I took the task of writing an interpretation
of the CLA in plainer language.  When I took it to Legal, the reply was
clear -- we do not need to provide a second, duplicate document that
covers the same content as the CLA.  It would be like providing legal
interpretation for the world.  If we want to make the CLA more clear,
let's request changes to the document itself, not create a special
interpretive document.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20080102/6f6b0ed0/attachment.sig>