On 06/09/2016 10:03, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2016-09-06 9:48 GMT+02:00 Ralf Corsepius <rc040...@freenet.de>:
On 09/01/2016 06:56 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
Nicolas, can you share your thoughts on this?
libdvdcss's legal situation in Germany is widely unclear[1].
According to German laws cracking "wirksame technische Maßnahmen“
("effective technical measures") of copy protection is unlawful.
The fundamental question in this context is: "Does CSS (still) qualify as an
effective technical measures of copy protection?"
Answer: Nobody knows. Only courts would be able to answer this question.
I.e. the legal risks of libdvdcss have not changed for years, i.e. should
libdvdcss binaries enter RPMFusion, esp. German RPMFusion mirror
owners/mirror managers are not unlikely to be confronted with legal action.
How many legal action have occurred ?
My understanding is a lot of countries have provision for
inter-operability (including the US). I don't know if such a provision
exists in Germany, but that would then allow to ship libdvdcss safely.
I had a short discussion with Adrian about mirrors. I may not be
transcribing his words exactly, but he basically said shipping libdvdcss
is not worst than all the patent encumbered stuff for US mirrors. We can
still reach specifically to mirror admins to get their feeling.
If mirroring libdvdcss is still a concern, we may want to ship libdvdcss
in a dedicated repo so mirrors can exclude it easily.
If that is not enough, we might do as Fedora does for openh264, that is
use the RPM Fusion infra for the SCM and building the package, but
upload it to another host. Given Pix mail from this morning, I guess it
could be where Livna was hosted. That is more burden on the RPM Fusion
infra and infra admins though... And it is not as straight-forward and
convenient for end-users.
Regards,
Xavier
PS: the link to the page I created in the wiki about libdvdcss :
http://rpmfusion.org/libdvdcss
