www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Daniel Shahaf (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-163) Are "Ubuntu License 1.0" licensed fonts allowed in the repo
Date Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:20:16 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-163?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13631036#comment-13631036
] 

Daniel Shahaf commented on LEGAL-163:
-------------------------------------


-1 (not binding).  The license is viral so not ALv2-compatible.


Why did Ubuntu invent a new license?  Surely they are aware of the
issues around license proliferation.

                
> Are "Ubuntu License 1.0" licensed fonts allowed in the repo
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-163
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-163
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Andreas Lehmkühler
>
> We like to include some ubuntu fonts in our testsuite. They are licensed using the "Ubuntu
License 1.0" [1].  
> I'm not a license expert, but it looks ok to me. WDYT? Is it ok to add those as test
resources to out svn repository? Is it ok to ship them as part of the source tarball?
> [1] http://font.ubuntu.com/licence/
> TIA

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message