Re: libdvdcss in RPM Fusion ?
On Ter, 2016-09-06 at 12:13 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/06/2016 10:03 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>
> 2016-09-06 9:48 GMT+02:00 Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)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 ?
AFAICT, none. I am inclined to believe all German sites shied away
from
shipping libdvdcss, to avoid these risks.
Reading this thread and think about, my conclusion is: that is an kind
of politic decision ... , and maybe we should contact a lawyer. One
idea/suggestion that I recalled, is workaround the problem of legality
doing a statement like "we remove package if someone ask for it with
one legal support decision" , the fact is : we don't have an expressed
decision that is nonlegal , so until then we may consider legal, if
someone "ask" to remove wiit based on some law, we remove it and don't
have problem, anyway a lawyer can help in terms that we can use .
I prefer not have an special repo and keep it simple.
Ralf
--
Sérgio M. B.