2011/7/14 blind Pete <[email protected]>: > on Wed, 13 Jul 2011 02:04 > in the Usenet newsgroup gmane.linux.mageia.devel > Ernest N. Wilcox Jr. wrote: > >>> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:16:24 +0200 >>> From: Wolfgang Bornath <[email protected]> >>> To: Mageia development mailing-list <mageia-dev- > [email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [Mageia-dev] Repository question: where do we put >>> non-free+tainted RPMs? >> Message-ID: >> >> <CA+h4nj6KtYu8vUFcZ4mWUO08J5ZyxB5XnN2bsSLoqm8R7w6E=w...@mail.gmail.com> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >>> >>> 2011/7/12 andre999 <[email protected]>: >>> > Wolfgang Bornath a ?crit : >>> >> >>> >> 2011/7/9 andre999<[email protected]>: >>> >>> >>> >>> Wolfgang Bornath a ?crit : >>> >>>> >>> >>>> 2011/7/8 Thorsten van Lil<[email protected]>: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Am 08.07.2011 10:42, schrieb Wolfgang Bornath: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> 2011/7/8 James Kerr<jim- > t9WuiTNHXmZ/[email protected]>: >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> 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. > > Does that lawnmower have wheels on it? The wheel has been patented. > <www.ipmenu.com/archive/AUI_2001100012.pdf> > > I do not live in the USA. I am not a lawyer. > > If you are interested, I can give you some background about why I > laugh at some patents.
Everybody here laughs at software patents (more or less). That's not the issue. -- wobo
