FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-02-2008, 02:33 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

> Red Hat as the copyright holder can do this however IIUC which then can
> choose to declare the license of the specs under a permissive license
> via a header on the spec files. Wouldn't that solve this issue?

Well, let me be more clear (and verbose) about this:

What the CLA says:

2. Contributor Grant of License. You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on
behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the
Project:
* (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up,
royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce,
prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform,
sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative
works; and,
* (b) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up,
royalty free, irrevocable (subject to Section 3) patent license
to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and
otherwise transfer your Contribution and derivative works
thereof, where such license applies only to those patent claims
licensable by you that are necessarily infringed by your
Contribution alone or by combination of your Contribution with
the work to which you submitted the Contribution. Except for the
license granted in this section, you reserve all right, title
and interest in and to your Contributions.

What this means:

You're not assigning copyright to Red Hat, you're merely giving them a
copyright license that enables them to "reproduce, prepare derivative
works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute
your Contribution and such derivative works". You're also giving these
same rights to every recipient of your contribution.

Now, Red Hat can sublicense the spec files, but the previously granted
rights are still granted. So really, what we'd be able to do is say:

/***

The license of all otherwise unlicensed Contributions to Fedora from
Fedora Contributors (under the Fedora CLA) is as follows:

1. Recipients of this software have:
* (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up,
royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare
derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and
distribute this Contribution and such derivative works; and,
* (b) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up,
royalty free, irrevocable (subject to Section 2) patent license to make,
have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer this
Contribution and derivative works thereof, where such license applies
only to those patent claims licensable by the original Contributor that
are necessarily infringed by this Contribution alone or by combination
of this Contribution with the work to which the Contributor submitted
the Contribution.

2. Reciprocity. As of the date any such litigation is filed, this patent
grant shall immediately terminate with respect to any party that
institutes patent litigation against the Contributor (including a
cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that this
Contribution, or the work to which the Contributor has contributed,
constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement.

***/

Why? Because that's what the CLA says. And we can't take that away by
default without invalidating the CLA. As I said before, Red Hat (or
anyone receiving a copy) could sublicense the spec file, but anyone
wishing to could simply choose to ignore that sublicense and instead use
the grants given by the CLA to the work.

~spot


_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:02 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:52:16 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> >>>
> >>> For the Fedora Board to say "all spec files are under the BSD license,
> >>> unless otherwise specified", it would directly conflict with the CLA.
> >> Red Hat as the copyright holder
> > Red Hat is not the copyright holder - period.
>
> The CLA which all contributors have signed certainly does indicate
> otherwise.

No it doesn't. As spot already pointed out, it's giving Red Hat a
copyright license. It is not assigning the copyright of the original
work to Red Hat.

josh

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:18 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On 02.01.2008 15:34, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 03:18:19PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is
>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up.
>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and
>> the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a
>> official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as <foo> if
>> not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board
>> in a official place.
> The Board discussed this, and decided that the spec files need to be
> licensed in one of two ways:
>
> 1) preferred - with the same license as the source code it builds.
> This is the default unless the spec file specifies otherwise. As
> every Fedora-acceptable license allows for derivative works, this
> should satisfy people's needs and obeys the principle of least
> surprise.
>
> 2) less preferred - with a license that is extremely permissive, such
> as MIT/X11, specified in the spec file itself.

Okay, but was that written down somewhere in a official place so people
can look it up and put in save place when they pick up a spec file from
Fedora? Otherwise the decision is of no value.

Cu
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:23 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is
>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up.
>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this?
> Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA,
> clause 2:
> [...]
> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that
> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much
> whatever.

The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat.
it has no meaning for a third party.

It's like company A and company B having a contract that all work done
by company A which gets submitted to B is bound to that contract. But
that has no meaning for a company C that might want to pick up the work
from company B.

CU
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:28 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote:


Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:


The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is
still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up.
@Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this?


Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA,
clause 2:
[...]
yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that
folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much
whatever.



The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat.
it has no meaning for a third party.

Except, the CLA explicitly defines the license for Fedora contributions,
for Red Hat and all recipients of Fedora.


In that context, it has meaning for third parties.

~spot



_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:39 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On 02.01.2008 16:33, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>> Red Hat as the copyright holder can do this however IIUC which then can
>> choose to declare the license of the specs under a permissive license
>> via a header on the spec files. Wouldn't that solve this issue?
>
> Well, let me be more clear (and verbose) about this:
> What the CLA says:
> [...]
> Now, Red Hat can sublicense the spec files, but the previously granted
> rights are still granted. So really, what we'd be able to do is say:
>
> /***
>
> The license of all otherwise unlicensed Contributions to Fedora from
> Fedora Contributors (under the Fedora CLA) is as follows:
> [...]
> ***/
>
> Why? Because that's what the CLA says. And we can't take that away by
> default without invalidating the CLA.

+1 -- And alternative would be: ask the Fedora contributers to specify
the license of their spec file.

> As I said before, Red Hat (or
> anyone receiving a copy) could sublicense the spec file, but anyone
> wishing to could simply choose to ignore that sublicense and instead use
> the grants given by the CLA to the work.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CLA doesn't give 3rd partys that get
Software from Fedora any rights as the CLA is a contract between
Contributers and Fedora/Red Hat. Thus if my neighbor gets spec files
from Fedora then he can't know if what he got is bound to the CLA.

Further: Is there a single CLA? Beside cla_fedora there are other groups
in the accounts system -- cla_dell, cla_ibm and cla_redhat. Outsiders or
I don't know how the CLA looks that members of that groups signed.

What really confuses me: Our own package review guidelines say: "SHOULD:
If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.".
Why don't we obey out own rules and clearly specify what the code (spec
files in this case) we release is licensed as (that is the reasons for
that rule afaics).

CU
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:46 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On 02.01.2008 17:28, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is
>>>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up.
>>>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this?
>>> Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA,
>>> clause 2:
>>> [...]
>>> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that
>>> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much
>>> whatever.
>> The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat.
>> it has no meaning for a third party.
> Except, the CLA explicitly defines the license for Fedora contributions,
> for Red Hat and all recipients of Fedora.

How should a 3rd party know that and be sure about it? Is that written
down somewhere?

Cu
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:48 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 02.01.2008 17:28, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is
>>>>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up.
>>>>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this?
>>>> Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA,
>>>> clause 2:
>>>> [...]
>>>> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that
>>>> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much
>>>> whatever.
>>> The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat.
>>> it has no meaning for a third party.
>> Except, the CLA explicitly defines the license for Fedora contributions,
>> for Red Hat and all recipients of Fedora.
>
> How should a 3rd party know that and be sure about it? Is that written
> down somewhere?

Only in the CLA, which is admittedly, less than ideal.

The best case (at least, from a legal perspective), is to have the CLA
license grant included in every otherwise unlicensed spec file.

The next best thing is a reference URL to the CLA license grant included
in every otherwise unlicensed spec file.

The third best thing is simply having a mention to the CLA license grant
on the wiki (seems like a good fit for an addendum to the Licensing page).

~spot

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 03:51 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CLA doesn't give 3rd partys that get
> Software from Fedora any rights as the CLA is a contract between
> Contributers and Fedora/Red Hat. Thus if my neighbor gets spec files
> from Fedora then he can't know if what he got is bound to the CLA.

You're wrong.

Even though the CLA is a contract between contributors and Fedora, it
explicitly grants rights to Red Hat _and_ all recipients of the
Contributed works (aka Fedora).

To me, this seems like more of a documentation issue, and less of a "the
license on spec files is now FOO" issue, since the CLA already has that
covered.

~spot

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2008, 04:09 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default permission to use spec files in other projects

On 02.01.2008 17:51, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CLA doesn't give 3rd partys that get
>> Software from Fedora any rights as the CLA is a contract between
>> Contributers and Fedora/Red Hat. Thus if my neighbor gets spec files
>> from Fedora then he can't know if what he got is bound to the CLA.
> You're wrong.

I think you still didn't get my point

> Even though the CLA is a contract between contributors and Fedora, it
> explicitly grants rights to Red Hat _and_ all recipients of the
> Contributed works (aka Fedora).

Sure, but I can't know if the all work I get from Fedora was submitted
by someone that signed the CLA. For you that might be obvious, but for
outsiders it's not, thus they can't rely on it.

> To me, this seems like more of a documentation issue, [...]

+1

Cu
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:01 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org