On Fri 2008-10-31 19:45, Imanol Celaya wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Aaron Hussein Griffin < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hey guys, > > > > I just got the email below and want to take this opportunity to point > > a few things out: > > > > Licenses are important. If a project has no license that DOES NOT mean > > you are able to redistribute it by adding a file that says "Free to > > use". Just because it is in the AUR doesn't mean we are in the clear. > > > > That said, I believe this email is a little silly for three reasons: > > a) Nothing there is stolen. It is a PKGBUILD. If it is illegal to > > redistribute the source, then the end user is liable (something we > > DON'T want). > > b) The original tarball no longer exists. > > c) I have seen no proof of copyright. > > > > Still, I do want to take this opportunity to point out that we NEED to > > be more careful here. > > > > > although the COPYING file it's wrong, isn't this the same "trick" we use > with acroread?
I agree, there is a lot of stuff like that (not redistributable) in AUR and I don't see why it shouldn't stay there. There is no copyright infringement IMHO. In this case the author explicitly asked to remove the PKGBUILD, so I think it should be removed to avoid legal actions against Arch Linux, but it should be stated publicly that the author is a fucktard^W^W wrong. -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino
