Am Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:29:38 +0000 schrieb "Dicebot" <[email protected]>:
> On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 12:48:04 UTC, John Colvin wrote: > >> While I respect your point of view on the matter (and agree > >> with it to a large extent), it's not your head on the line > >> here. > >> Do the mirror owners even know that - if they charge for their > >> services - it could be argued that they are committing a > >> criminal offence under US law by redistributing copyrighted > >> material without a license for commercial advantage? > > > > sorry, I phrased that badly: obviously it is the mirror owners > > responsibility to understand the law. > > > > What I'm trying to ask is "are the mirror owners aware that > > they are redistributing copyrighted material without a license > > because of your decisions?" > > If they care. License is part of the package and package > description explicitly says "Licenses: custom". There are no > commercial mirrors as far as I know though but if anyone crazy > decided to create one, all information to check such stuff is > there. archlinux has a 'pragmatic' approach regarding licenses & patents anyway. They also ship libdvdcss, mesa with "--enable-texture-float", all multimedia codec packages are in the standard repos etc.
