On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 07:11:13PM +0300, Etienne Champetier wrote: > Le lun. 3 août 2020 à 00:04, Rosen Penev a écrit : >> The remerged OpenWrt project is legally represented by the Software >> in the Public Interest (SPI) - an US 501(c)(3) non-profit >> organization which is managing our OpenWrt trademark, handling our >> donations and helping us with legal problems. > > Software Freedom Conservancy (future replacement of SPI) is also US > based > >> Whenever discussion about patents arise, I usually point to Fedora >> whose parent company is Red Hat, which is based in the US. There are >> many things that they do not distribute that OpenWrt does for legal >> reasons. Should Fedora's practices be mirrored or should a more >> liberal policy regarding patented functionality be taken?
For OpenWRT at least, might Debian be a more appropriate exemplar than Fedora? Unlike Fedora AFAIK, but like OpenWRT, Debian is represented in some sense by SPI: https://www.spi-inc.org/projects/debian/ . The debian-legal mailing list archives can be searched for the decisions taken by the debian-legal team, and the reasoning behind those decisions: https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/ . In cases where doubt still remains, OpenWRT devs should probably consult with staff of the SPI (currently, the project liaisons are listed as John Crispin and Imre Kaloz: https://www.spi-inc.org/projects/openwrt/ ) and/or with staff of the Software Freedom Conservancy. IMO, this should be done via a publicly archived mailing list, for transparency. -- A: When it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: When is top-posting a bad thing? () ASCII ribbon campaign. Please avoid HTML emails & proprietary /\ file formats. (Why? See e.g. https://v.gd/jrmGbS ). Thank you. _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
