the libdvdcss issue

[Andreas Thienemann]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Richard Körber wrote:

> For me it means that if RPMfusion is offering software that is illegal in
> Germany, I will stop blogging about it in fedorablog.de and remove the
> package lists from repowatch.fedorablog.de. You can blame me for being a
> sissy, but I see no other option for me.

Nobody is calling anybody a sissy. The problem however is, that there are 
many different laws on the globe. Just following the least common 
denominator means we can close down.

Same for fedora. There is a lot of code in fedora which is able to 
circumvent copy protection measures. Or even worse, do you remember the 
Copy Protection Measure which was based on the Autorun functionality of 
Windows? IIRC correctly someone was sued for mentioning that disabling 
Autorun will prevent the Copy Protection from working.

Right now fedora does not even have a Windows compatible Autorun 
functionality. We're all gonna die^H^H^Hbe sued...

Do you see why I consider the whole "let's not ship it, it's illegal in
some place" to be highly hypocritical?



> I am tired about this discussion. It cannot be that first we find
> something that seemed like a consensus against libdvdcss, and then
> suddenly voices appear again pro libdvdcss, and the discussion starts all
> over again.

You joined up late. The initial idea was to ship libdvdcss but that was 
later retracted. Unfortunately


regards,
 andreas