[Mageia-dev] Repository question: where do we put non-free+tainted RPMs?

[nicolas vigier]

On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Ernest N. Wilcox Jr. wrote:

> > Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:16:24 +0200
> > From: Wolfgang Bornath <molch.b at googlemail.com>
> > To: Mageia development mailing-list <mageia-dev at mageia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Mageia-dev] Repository question: where do we put
> >         non-free+tainted RPMs?
> Message-ID:
>         <CA+h4nj6KtYu8vUFcZ4mWUO08J5ZyxB5XnN2bsSLoqm8R7w6E=w at mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > 
> > 2011/7/12 andre999 <andr55 at laposte.net>:
> > > Wolfgang Bornath a ?crit :
> > >>
> > >> 2011/7/9 andre999<andr55 at laposte.net>:
> > >>>
> > >>> Wolfgang Bornath a ?crit :
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 2011/7/8 Thorsten van Lil<tvl83 at gmx.de>:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Am 08.07.2011 10:42, schrieb Wolfgang Bornath:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 2011/7/8 James Kerr<jim at jkerr82508.free-online.co.uk>:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> This thread has strayed far from the original question, > which 
> could
> > >>>>>>> be
> > >>>>>>> re-stated as:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Should tainted free software and tainted nonfree software be
> > >>>>>>> commingled
> > >>>>>>> in a
> > >>>>>>> single tainted repository?
> 
> ...
> 
> > >> Besides, tainted is not only about patents, it's also about software
> > >> which is illegal in certain countries (like libdvdcss).
> > >
> > > Ok, a relatively limited application.
> > >
> > > So in all, maybe a handful of packages at most should be in tainted.
> > > So why do we have more than 150 ?
> 
> > Sorry, but I do not understand your way of thinking. If a law exists
> > it exists. It does not matter to a law whether it is likely to be
> > enforced. Period.
> > This is not paranoia, it is a matter of mind set. If robbery would not
> > be prosecuted, would you go out and earn your doe by taking away
> > handbags from old ladies? You would not, because it is wrong. For
> > those who are living in countries where patents are valid and accepted
> > by the law, using a patented software is wrong. So you must accept
> > that there are people who would not do it. Telling them how they
> > should think about it is not ours. That's why we have the tainted
> > repo.
> > 
> > -- 
> > wobo
> 
> +1
> 
> I live in the USA, and while I do not personally support the concept of 
> software pantents, I also do not want to violate them as long as they are 
> leagally recognized where I live.
> 
> For me, this is not a matter of risk, but one of ethics, morality, and 
> respect. IMHO, the fact that my Countries Society recognizes patents as being 
> legally binding makes it my responsibility to honor them, so I want to know if 
> a software package may be affected by one or more patent(s) before I install it 
> on my computer. If  I know that (for example) package foo is affected by a 
> patent, I can search for the patent holder, and make contact to request 
> permission to ust the software, then abide with their response. This way, I 
> fulfill my obligation to ask permission before using software that is (or may 
> be) affected by some one elses property. I would no more use patented software 
> without permission here in the USA than I would take my neighbor's lawnmower 
> to cut my grass without his permission.
> 
> I understand that the following may not be practicable, but I would like all 
> software that is affected by a patent (and perhaps other licensing or copyright 
> restrictions) to be placed in a "restricted" (tainted) repository. Also I 
> would like to see patent (or contact) information in the software package's  
> description to help facilitate my ability to ask permission to use the 
> software. By doing these things, Mageia is doing more to support my ability to 
> live by my personal convictions than to support patent law.

I think we should not do that. Because we probably have more useful
things to do than documenting patents and helping patent holders. And
because it doesn't help users, on the contrary, it makes it more
dangerous for them to use the software, because they cannot say they
didn't know about the patent.