Canonical’s IPRights Policy incompatible with Ubuntu licence policy

Michael Hall mhall119 at
Mon May 4 22:04:06 UTC 2015

On 05/04/2015 05:57 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On 4 May 2015 at 23:47, Michael Hall <mhall119 at> wrote:
>>>     On 05/04/2015 12:42 PM, Randall Ross  wrote:
>>>     > In the time it took to write this thread, there could have been several
>>>     > meetings with Canonical legal and likely a resolution.
>>>     Those meetings have already happened, the CC had them. We have been
>>>     given Canonical's position on the matter and passed that on to those who
>>>     made the inquiry.
>>> Maybe I missed it, what was the reason that was given for derivatives
>>> needing to recompile binaries?
>> Derivatives can either work fully within the archives, in which case
>> they don't need to do anything, or they can request a license grant from
>> Canonical to base their derived product off of Ubuntu's archives.
>> If they don't wish to do either, then they should take the source code
>> and build their own archives from that, as Ubuntu does with Debian and
>> CentOS does from Red Hat.
> You are avoiding the question.  Why would a licence be needed?
> Jonathan

Because they are not Ubuntu and they are using Ubuntu's resources.

Michael Hall
mhall119 at

More information about the Ubuntu-community-team mailing list