Re: Canonical’s IPRights Policy incompatible with Ubuntu licence policy
bkerensa at ubuntu.com
Mon May 4 22:38:58 UTC 2015
So to be clear you are basically saying derivs do not get the same freedoms
that Ubuntu gets from upstream?
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Michael Hall <mhall119 at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On 05/04/2015 05:57 PM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > On 4 May 2015 at 23:47, Michael Hall <mhall119 at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >>> On 05/04/2015 12:42 PM, Randall Ross wrote:
> >>> > In the time it took to write this thread, there could have been
> >>> > 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 ubuntu.com
> Ubuntu-community-team mailing list
> Ubuntu-community-team at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
*"I am what I am because of who we all are" - Ubuntu*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-community-team