I took a look at these restrictions and they were quite carefully crafted indeed. RedHat seemingly wanted to create a situation where they can release something that passes as open source but that at the same time would not be approved of many distributions - leaving the font basically for themselves while getting some good PR.
All the "restrictions" do is state already obvious things (such as that using the font in a document does not GPL the document's contents) and they do not contradict the GPL itself. Unless if you read the licenses as unqualified zealot, which RedHat was perhaps counting on. There is no one single line in those restrictions that would make the fonts "non- distributable". My 0.02$ is that Ubuntu project should make its own decision over the inclusion of these fonts. -- [needs-packaging] Ubuntu needs the Liberation Fonts https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/113889 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
