On 10/29/2012 03:32 PM, Matija Šuklje wrote: > On Ponedeljek 29. of October 2012 15.52.20 Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Matthew Thode wrote: >>> It's looking hard to be able to add the spotify ebuild to tree because >>> of licensing concerns. >>> >>> http://www.spotify.com/us/legal/end-user-agreement/ >> >> This concerns not so much the client software, but their "service" and >> the contents provided through it. > > Well, the “Spotify Software” is included at least it §4 and also in general > included in the “service” term. The license agreement is lacking though. > > In any case Gentoo can’t be the 3rd party here and therefore not redistribute > it. > >>> 10:02 < prometheanfire > do you have a plaintext version? I can copy >>> the text, but just thought I'd ask :D >>> 10:02 < dan^spotify > No, and copy+pasting it into a text file isn't >>> something we really want you to to do, since it changes from time-to-time >>> 10:04 < prometheanfire > ok, I'll see what the proper course of action >>> is, I think you have us accept the license on first start right? >>> 10:04 < dan^spotify > Correct >>> 10:04 < dan^spotify > Well, first login >>> 10:05 < prometheanfire > just as good probably >>> 10:05 < dan^spotify > If you've already accepted the most up-to-date >>> license on another machine, you won't be prompted again >>> >>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=373093 >>> >>> They want it to be accepted through the app. Is there a way this is >>> compatible with Gentoo? >> >> We need a plaintext license file for the client that we put in >> ${PORTDIR}licenses/, so users can look at it before they install the >> package. > > Yup. > > They probably deem §§ 3 and 4 to be the license, but it’s quite lacking IMHO. > So since full copyright is default, this means that we’re not allowed to > redistribute it. RESTRICT="mirror" we have to do here. > > As a sub-optimal solution, Rich’s idea to create a Spotify license and point > the users to the actual EULA. > > But unless they clarify the software license for their *client*, I’d rather > we > don’t include it. Too messy. > >> Maybe it would make more sense to add one of the free alternatives? >> >> http://despotify.se/ >> https://gitorious.org/libopenspotify >> >> media-sound/despotify is already in Sunrise, bug 307795. > > Seems a better idea IMHO. > > > cheers, > Matija > > P.S. As Rich mentioned, the difference between a (real) license and “license > agreement” is that a license grants you more rights then you get by law and > therefore you don’t have to agree to it, since your rights are not > diminished; > a so called license agreement (EULA, ToS, whatever_agreement) has nothing to > do with a (real) license apart from the falsely borrowed name and you have to > agree with it, since your statutory rights are diminished/voided. >
Got confirmation via irc that the license is for the client as well, dunno if that's good enough... -- -- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
