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

Re: Etch timeline is unrealistic because non-free firmware is NOT being dealt with

On Saturday 05 August 2006 17:30, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> In linux.debian.kernel Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote:
> >> I see that the lawyers of SuSE and Red Hat do not believe this to be
> >> true or at least do not consider it a problem, and this is enough for
> >> me to ignore the opinion of the debian-legal@ armchair lawyers.
> >
> >Could they have signed license agreements that we (not being
> >executives of RHAT and Novell) don't know about?
> While it may be possible in theory, it's also very hard to believe.

If there are any signed license agreements, then they will probably drop some 
notes in the {src}.rpm packages themselves they distribute to give their 
users a clue, since these users are the most interested end to be aware of 
that legal situation.

pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB 

Reply to: