Canonical’s IPRights Policy incompatible with Ubuntu licence policy

[Michael Hall]

No, we're saying they get the same freedoms as Ubuntu gets. Ubuntu
re-builds Debian's archives from source, we host our own packages from
which we build and distribute our distro. We don't point Ubuntu installs
at Debian's servers for installs and updates, we don't call our archives
Debian or their archives Ubuntu.

Moreover, for non-commercial derivatives Canonical offers free (or
nearly free) use of Ubuntu's archives for the distribution for those
distros. They don't have to do all of their work within Ubuntu. All we
ask is that they don't call it Ubuntu. This works our well for Mint and
Elementary and a number of other derivatives who benefit directly from
Ubuntu's resources.

Michael Hall
mhall119 at ubuntu.com

On 05/04/2015 06:38 PM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> 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
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 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 ubuntu.com <mailto:mhall119 at ubuntu.com>
> 
>     --
>     Ubuntu-community-team mailing list
>     Ubuntu-community-team at lists.ubuntu.com
>     <mailto:Ubuntu-community-team at lists.ubuntu.com>
>     Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>     https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-community-team
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> /*Benjamin Kerensa*/
> /http://benjaminkerensa.com/
> /"I am what I am because of who we all are" - Ubuntu/