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

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Legal aspects of fedora based appliances



Am Mittwoch, den 09.12.2009, 19:19 -0500 schrieb Paul W. Frields:
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 10:22:07PM +0100, Fabian Deutsch wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 09.12.2009, 16:14 -0500 schrieb Paul W. Frields:
> > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 09:57:10PM +0100, Fabian Deutsch wrote:
> > > > Hello.
> > > > 
> > > > Fedora contains various tools for appliance creation. AFAIK it is
> > > > intended that Fedora shall be used as a base for various appliances ISVs
> > > > or OEMs want to create. But there is there some legal-guide which
> > > > summarizes the legal aspects of Fedora based appliances e.g. when I want
> > > > to distribute a Fedora AOS with some proprietary software? (As some kind
> > > > of media-center).
> > > 
> > > I'm assuming you mean guidance on whether, and how, these types of
> > > appliances can use the "Fedora" name and associated trademarks. You
> > > can find our full trademark guidelines here:
> > > 
> > >   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines
> > > 
> > > The particular section on appliances and OS images is here:
> > > 
> > >   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_unmodified_Fedora_software
> > >   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_combinations_of_Fedora_software_with_non-Fedora_or_modified_Fedora_software
> > 
> > The usage of the "Fedora" tardemark is just one point. There are more
> > questions (for me at least :) ), like:
> > Will a appliance providers have to keep the sources of all distributed
> > packages, even if they are official Fedora packages?
> 
> Spot or someone else will correct me if I go wrong here, but because
> the Fedora Project ships source pursuant to the requirements of the
> GPLv2 section 3(a), downstream remixers cannot simply point to the
> Fedora Project for source distribution (as in section 3(c)).  This is
> intentional and unlikely to change in the near future.  Also, section
> 3(c) as I understand it is not workable for commercial redistributors.

Okay. Thansk to clarify this.

> The best solution I can imagine is for downstream remixers to simply
> prepare the matching source collection, and offer it at the same point
> of distribution under GPL 3(a) as well.  IANAL, TINLA, and so forth.

But remixers could use the srpms, provided in the official Fedora spins,
to build some custom "appliance"-spin?

fabian



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