[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Legality of Fedora in production environment

Yes, I have some examples (in Russian). But there is no guarantee that it contains "currently expected" text...

It looks like Alan has the beginnings of something that we can use for the text.

In the meantime, you should try to scan/take photos of these certificates, put them up on the web, and send a link to the images to this thread.

In addition, if translations to English could be provided then that would be very helpful.

As I understand, when our local distributors say "don't download, buy our box with a paper", it is some kind of business for them -- i.e. to intimidate users and to force them to buy their boxes instead of free download. Currently I am even not sure that such a solution actually work, but they recommend it.

How unfortunate.

Sadly, that's not something the Fedora project or any of the individuals associated with it can do anything about.

However, what we can do is come up with an elaborate certificate, suitable for printing and stickering, capable of being beribboned, etc. Note this is not an actual legal document.

Expected by whom?... By the checking policeman?..


I think the text should be "as robast, as possible". Besides the "unlimited number of users and systems", it should say that "the holographic label is not required", that the label on the case "designed for M*crosoft" does not conflict with, etc.

BTW, one of the precedents is when sysadmin was arrested for absence of holographic labels on a computer with Linux. (Next day was released, surely). The police was instructed that each server must have holographic...

This seems like something that your local linux LUG, Unix group, or EFF should try to straighten out.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]