Status of ICQ-related apps in Fedora.
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 5 May 2010, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > It seems, that *all* 3rd party software, which is should connect to > ICQ networks for normal operation, violates their EULA (or urges users > to violate EULA). ... > Any opinions? more a matter of 'politics', rather than legal This is a slippery slope. Fedora has no mandate to be a private contractual analysis or enforcement venue (I think ...) 'vetting' software license terms for freedom is one thing; avoiding affirmative legal (of matters of governmentally promulgated law) prohibitions ... here, patent, trademark, copyright I am not aware of a general governmentally imposed legal duty to ** not ** publish software that MIGHT be use to act in a way a matter of 'private law' [here: a contract] One cannot know all laws of all jurisdictions of the world. Red Hat as the owner of the Fedora project ultimately will override any call that might get it subject to liability within the jurisdictions it operates. (one assumes ...) Even more tellingly, one cannot begin know all possible contracts purporting to govern or impair actions by third parties. To try to do so leads to 'analysis paralysis' and simply never doing anything. The prior para. as to Red Hat's ability to protect itself and its actions applies here as well If a person signing the Fedora CLA is uncomfortable proceeding, they need to opt of participating But really, a lay person has to decide for themself, possibly with the advice of counsel. This venue, it seems to me, has to not open up the infinite alleys of playing lawyer and 'enforcing' private contract pairings beyond statutory prohibition or 'tortious' [asserted wrongful acts, not arising our of contract] conduct. - ---------------start disclaimer------------------- I_A_AL, but not your lawyer. I offer legal advice and formal opinion only within the confines of a previously established and explicit attorney-client relationship where privilege may be had; and NEVER on a public list server. - ----------------end disclaimers ------------------ As I say, a slippery slope, and a personal actions ('body politic') question rather than a 'fedora-legal' one (I think) - -- Russ herrold -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFL4XbkMRh1QZtklkQRAs0YAKChMXptTO3/688GXYx7AXF76x2RsgCdHj8l 9H24YHssfzdzSK2maluN6vo= =2x7Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
[Fedora Users] [Fedora Maintainers] [Fedora Desktop] [Fedora SELinux] [Big List of Linux Books] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [KDE Users] [Fedora Tools]