On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 11:10, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Marc Schwartz wrote: > > > > > > Even if the softwares aren't distributed in the prohibited countries? > > > Or Fedora isn't an internatial project? E.g. the Translation Project > > > suggests so. > > > > > RH is a U.S. company operating under U.S. law. Microsoft is a U.S. > > company operating under U.S. law. > > > > If Microsoft sues RH, under whose jurisdiction do you think that a civil > > trial would take place? Tasmania? > > Probably you noticed I'm not a lawyer :-) So you mean RH can be trialed in > the US if a RH partner in Tasmania supports things forbidden in US? As you point out, IANAL either and you are getting into specific issues that would be subject to interpretation where there may or may not be predicate case law. RH's liability with respect to the actions of a partner would depend upon very specific details relative to the relationships and roles each party plays. Don't forget the GPL itself is yet to be tested legally..... The key is that RH is not going to take a chance, even remotely, of being encumbered by litigation. The only way to do that is to not engage in any activity that is not clearly black and white. > Or you mean they don't know and they think it isn't worth investigating? > > If they think it's not worth why don't they say so if always asked? > > > As I said, you have the option of downloading the components from other > > sources or using another distribution. > > Yes, I keep recommending the later to those who needs it for a year but > somehow they aren't always very pleased with that answer :-) Not much we can do about that. You can't satisfy everybody. Marc
