Re: the libdvdcss issue
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