Hi Roozbeh, On Tuesday, 21. September 2004 20:10, Roozbeh Pournader wrote: > I was wondering if I can do anything about not being able to use Fedora > Core legally. To use software that is partly my own (I am a copyright > co-holder for Mozilla, FriBidi, GNOME translations (sometimes under the > name "FarsiWeb", Pango, etc), I need to "warrant that I am not located > in Iran": > > http://mirror.linux.duke.edu/pub/fedora/linux/core/test/2.91/x86_64/os/eula >.txt > > But the problem is that I live there, and have been living there while > working on all those pieces of software The restrictions are required by US law. If you download Fedora from any mirror outside the US then these restrictions do not apply as long as these other download locations are not affected by likewise regulations. It's perfectly legal **for you** to download Fedora from any mirror outside of the US without these restrictions. > Is Fedora allowed to do that, even when I have copylefted parts of the > software under GPL and LGPL? Won't that be adding more restrictions, and > against the explicit text in the licenses that says "You may not impose > any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights > granted herein"? Also, isn't the same EULA claim that the whole > collective work is under GPL? If yes, how can it add those restrictions? It's not a matter of licenses or EULAs. It's a matter of US export regulations. And those apply to all exported goods, no matter under what conditions they are usually distributed. Common, binding law always beats the specifics of an individual license agreement. > I would appreciate any kind of comment or recommendations, on-list or > off-list. This has somehow created a mental problem for me... Without any further discussion, everybody with a sane mind knows these export restrictions on Fedora and its encryption elements are plain ridiculous. But if the US wants to play the game like that then you have to adapt. You said you were the copyright holder on parts of Fedora. Do you contribute directly to the Fedora project? If yes, then I would rethink this and complain about this situation to Red Hat. They can't do anything on this matter directly though. But maybe someday in the future there will be enough "Red Hat" companies in the US that recognize that the US way of approaching "problematic" countries like Iran hurts vital US business interests. There always has to be a lobby if you want laws to change. Better make it a lobby with money too. Back to your situation: take Debian for example. If you ever downloaded a set of Debian CDs then you'll have noticed that there exists a US version and a non-US version. The US version lacks crypto stuff and patented parts that can be distributed freely elsewhere in the world. That is due to the same export restrictions (and patent issues of course). US legislation is harming Open Source. If you want to change that you have to set an example. Complain. Do you blog? No? Then just copy this thread and publish it in some blog. I was rather intrigued by your problem. State that you cannot directly contribute to Fedora due to export restrictions. Contribute to some other distribution/project outside of the US. We all know code will eventually spread evenly around the different projects because that's the nature of our development model. But make a point. regards, Tobias W.
