[Fedora-legal-list] Can I talk about RPM Fusion?

2008-11-04 Thread Steven Moix
Hello fedora-legal people! I'd like to know if I'm allowed to talk about RPM Fusion in a news I'm going to send to the French press? We don't have software patents in Europe, but I'm still not sure if it conflicts with some other guideline or legal issue. Thanks Steven Moix [EMAIL PROTECTED] __

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Can I talk about RPM Fusion?

2008-11-04 Thread Tom "spot" Callaway
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 18:35 +0100, Steven Moix wrote: > Hello fedora-legal people! > > I'd like to know if I'm allowed to talk about RPM Fusion in a news I'm > going to send to the French press? We don't have software patents in > Europe, but I'm still not sure if it conflicts with some other guid

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Is the EUPL v1.0 (European Union Public Licence) acceptable in Fedora

2008-11-04 Thread Luis Villa
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Tom spot Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 15:06 +, Caolán McNamara wrote: >> Here's one I hadn't be aware of before, the EUPL, European Union Public >> Licence: http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/eupl which affects something I was >> considering

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Can I talk about RPM Fusion?

2008-11-04 Thread Josh Boyer
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 12:48:47PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote: >On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 18:35 +0100, Steven Moix wrote: >> Hello fedora-legal people! >> >> I'd like to know if I'm allowed to talk about RPM Fusion in a news I'm >> going to send to the French press? We don't have software patents

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Is the EUPL v1.0 (European Union Public Licence) acceptable in Fedora

2008-11-04 Thread Tom "spot" Callaway
On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 15:06 +, Caolán McNamara wrote: > Here's one I hadn't be aware of before, the EUPL, European Union Public > Licence: http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/eupl which affects something I was > considering packaging. It does have in it an explicit ... This one is non-free, due to Artic

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Can I talk about RPM Fusion?

2008-11-04 Thread Tom "spot" Callaway
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 16:13 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 12:48:47PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > >On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 18:35 +0100, Steven Moix wrote: > >> Hello fedora-legal people! > >> > >> I'd like to know if I'm allowed to talk about RPM Fusion in a news I'm > >> g

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Is the EUPL v1.0 (European Union Public Licence) acceptable in Fedora

2008-11-04 Thread Tom "spot" Callaway
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 15:34 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Tom spot Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 15:06 +, Caolán McNamara wrote: > >> Here's one I hadn't be aware of before, the EUPL, European Union Public > >> Licence: http://ec.euro

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Can I talk about RPM Fusion?

2008-11-04 Thread Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
On Tuesday, 04 November 2008 at 18:35, Steven Moix wrote: > Hello fedora-legal people! > > I'd like to know if I'm allowed to talk about RPM Fusion in a news I'm > going to send to the French press? > We don't have software patents in Europe, I'm afraid that's not entirely true. The EPO has grant

[Fedora-legal-list] Re: Software is once again unpatentable in the United States

2008-11-04 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Jon Ciesla wrote: Matthew Woehlke wrote: Also from http://ben.klemens.org/blog/arch/0009.htm: Despite claiming that all that matters is the machine-or-transformation test, the ruling also bears in mind many other necessary conditions for patentability, such as the rule that a patent may not