[Fedora-legal-list] Re: Is the Monkey's Audio license "good"?
On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 2:51 PM Peter Lemenkov wrote: > > Hello All! > I don't think it worths the efforts - to package original MAC sources. > I'd look at libdemac instead (clean-room developed decoder-only > library): > > https://github.com/Rockbox/rockbox/tree/master/lib/rbcodec/codecs/demac > If at all possible, I'd like to have encoding too... -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Fedora-legal-list] Re: Is the Monkey's Audio license "good"?
(removing spdx-legal - this is off-topic for that list) Hi Neal, If it is foreseeable that this software would be proposed for packaging in Fedora, our preference would be for you to submit an issue to https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data . Assuming this license was found to be acceptable for Fedora, under current Fedora rules, you would need a new license tag to represent this, normally by requesting inclusion in the SPDX license list. However on an initial glance I am pretty skeptical that this license meets Fedora licensing standards. In this case I might recommend someone interested to try to get the upstream entity to switch to a standard FOSS license. Richard On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 5:46 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > Hello, > > I recently read a thread about someone asking about adding the > Monkey's Audio codec to openSUSE and it having an odd license[1], and > I was thinking of bringing this to Fedora as well. > > However, the license[2] is confusing, and I'm not sure if it > necessarily qualifies under Fedora's definition of good open source > software[3]. > > If it is, what kind of license tag should be used, or should a new one > be made for it? I'm leaning toward a new license tag, given that the > terms look "special". > > Thanks in advance and best regards, > Neal > > [1]: > https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/fact...@lists.opensuse.org/message/OR32LIUGQUZMXB6GQLUK62MD6VQTO2CR/ > [2]: https://www.monkeysaudio.com/license.html > [3]: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-approval/#_allowed_licenses ___ legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Fedora-legal-list] Re: Is the Monkey's Audio license "good"?
Hello All! I don't think it worths the efforts - to package original MAC sources. I'd look at libdemac instead (clean-room developed decoder-only library): https://github.com/Rockbox/rockbox/tree/master/lib/rbcodec/codecs/demac On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 11:46 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > Hello, > > I recently read a thread about someone asking about adding the > Monkey's Audio codec to openSUSE and it having an odd license[1], and > I was thinking of bringing this to Fedora as well. > > However, the license[2] is confusing, and I'm not sure if it > necessarily qualifies under Fedora's definition of good open source > software[3]. > > If it is, what kind of license tag should be used, or should a new one > be made for it? I'm leaning toward a new license tag, given that the > terms look "special". > > Thanks in advance and best regards, > Neal > > [1]: > https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/fact...@lists.opensuse.org/message/OR32LIUGQUZMXB6GQLUK62MD6VQTO2CR/ > [2]: https://www.monkeysaudio.com/license.html > [3]: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-approval/#_allowed_licenses > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > ___ > legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. ___ legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Fedora-legal-list] Re: Is the Monkey's Audio license "good"?
On 10/6/22 04:45, Neal Gompa wrote: If it is, what kind of license tag should be used, or should a new one be made for it? I'm leaning toward a new license tag, given that the terms look "special". It's definitely 'special', including the last bit about removing copies of the code from your storage device(s) if you don't agree with the terms. From an armchair-laywer's point of view, the rest of the terms look like MIT/BSD-style licensing. Free for use for any purpose, must acknowledge the usage of the software, no warranties. -- Kevin P. Fleming He/Him/His Principal Program Manager, RHEL Red Hat US/Eastern Time Zone ___ legal mailing list -- legal@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to legal-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
