Good evening,

Unless the provider is within California, which Arch Linux is not,
there is nothing the Californian state can do. This has been discussed
endlessly on the OpenBSD mailing list the past few days. It seems on
the Debian and Ubuntu mailing lists, they have been discussing how to
comply, less so whether they can ignore it entirely.

If Arch Linux doesn't comply, what is the Californian state prosecutors
going to do? Ban * Linux? Well then good luck running any digital
infrastructure.

Laws such as these are impossible to comply with, they are passed to
give the government the ability to fine, censor and shutdown any
organisation or company which they do not agree with, whether they have
a legitimate or illegitimate reason to do so.

If this was passed as a US federal law, then there could be some cause
for concern, but considering its currently just California (and I
believe its Colorado which wants to follow suit), they can only really
go after Californian companies and organisations, and they don't have
the power to really get people extradited from other countries to stand
trail in California.

So in the end, the worst I could see happen is that Arch Linux gets
banned in Cali, along with other non-complying distros, but Cali will
end up having seldom digital infrastructure, and will go back to the
dark ages.

The one important thing is, not to follow the example of MidnightBSD
which relicenced their project to ban Californians, which now makes it
non-free. If Arch is to be prohibited in Californian, it must come from
the state, rather than Arch.

Take care,
-- 
Polarian
Jabber/XMPP: [email protected]

Reply via email to