8:18 a.m.
Hello All!
Request: libdvdcss
Why not in RPM Fusion: The short story is: *It was agreed* on not to ship it due to
various reasons around the fact that libdvdcss is a bit more complicated (or
dangerous) than all the other software RPM Fusion offeres have.
The question is, who agreed not to ship libdvdcss (completely legal in
wast majority of countries) and when?
--
With best regards!
8:31 a.m.
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello All!
> Request: libdvdcss
> Why not in RPM Fusion: The short story is: *It was agreed* on not to ship it due to
> various reasons around the fact that libdvdcss is a bit more complicated (or
> dangerous) than all the other software RPM Fusion offeres have.
The question is, who agreed not to ship libdvdcss (completely legal in
wast majority of countries) and when?
I'm not here since a long time, but I already saw few threads about
this, so I guess archives could answer your Q.
--
Gianluca Sforna
http://morefedora.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/gianlucasforna
8:41 a.m.
Hello All.
2008/12/13, Gianluca Sforna <giallu(a)gmail.com>:
> The question is, who agreed not to ship libdvdcss (completely
legal in
> wast majority of countries) and when?
I'm not here since a long time, but I already saw few threads
about
this, so I guess archives could answer your Q.
I searched a bit, but cannot fuiind any traces of *agreement*.
Actually, there is the only relevant thread I found:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.rpmfusion.devel/2264
--
With best regards!
8:45 a.m.
On Saturday 13 December 2008 12:41:28 am Peter Lemenkov wrote:
Hello All.
2008/12/13, Gianluca Sforna <giallu(a)gmail.com>:
> > The question is, who agreed not to ship libdvdcss (completely legal in
> > wast majority of countries) and when?
>
> I'm not here since a long time, but I already saw few threads about
> this, so I guess archives could answer your Q.
I searched a bit, but cannot fuiind any traces of *agreement*.
Actually, there is the only relevant thread I found:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.rpmfusion.devel/2264
The current state of things is that Livna still lives (and ships *only*
libdvdcss), and that way RPMFusion can avoid shipping libdvdcss and get
advertised in countries where libdvdcss is illegal.
Regards,
--
Conrad Meyer <konrad(a)tylerc.org>
8:50 a.m.
2008/12/13, Conrad Meyer <konrad(a)tylerc.org>:
The current state of things is that Livna still lives (and ships
*only*
libdvdcss), and that way RPMFusion can avoid shipping libdvdcss and get
advertised in countries where libdvdcss is illegal.
The question is - who decided it. I wish to know whether rpmfusion is
a community-driven project or not.
--
With best regards!
9:06 a.m.
2008/12/13 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com>:
The question is - who decided it. I wish to know whether rpmfusion
is
a community-driven project or not.
Please read these:
http://rpmfusion.org/SteeringCommittee
http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2008-October/00...
I really hope this is the last time this is asked.
Bye,
Andrea.
9:09 a.m.
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I really hope this is the last time this is asked.
I bet not... ;)
--
Gianluca Sforna
http://morefedora.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/gianlucasforna
12:25 p.m.
On 13.12.2008 10:06, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
2008/12/13 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com>:
> The question is - who decided it. I wish to know whether rpmfusion is
> a community-driven project or not.
Please read these:
http://rpmfusion.org/SteeringCommittee
http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2008-October/00...
The decision itself is a lot older already; see the quoted part in this
mail:
http://lists.fedoraunity.org/pipermail/repo-merge-discussion/2007-April/0...
/me wonders where the origianl mail is, but it likely doesn't matter
I really hope this is the last time this is asked.
Fully agreed. This endless discussions make things worse and I fear some
people people that do and did a lot of work for RPM Fusion might leaving
if this discussion lever comes to an end. And I fear that discussions
like this could lead to the creation of new 3rd party repos that compete
with RPM Fusion. That afaics something most of us don't want.
If someone really want to do something good for Fedora I'd suggest this:
go and set up an additional repo (one that sits *on top* of RPM Fusion
again and doesn't compete with it, just like Livna does these days) up
somewhere (e.g. outside of the US and the EU) and not only put libdvdcss
in it, but also all the other things RPM Fusion cannnot distribute:
flash, java, adobe (there are likely more). That would solve not only
one problem that isn't one (as livna still distributes libdvdcss), but
will finally solve other problems as well (problems RPM Fusion can't
solve).
CU
knurd
12:45 p.m.
Hello All!
2008/12/13, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>:
> > The question is - who decided it. I wish to know whether
rpmfusion is
> > a community-driven project or not.
> Please read these:
> http://rpmfusion.org/SteeringCommittee
Understood - rpmfusion is not a community-project (important decisions
were made w/o asking community directly).
So, finally, what benefits rpmfusion provides over Livna? I see only
disadvantages (cannot include software, which someone claims illegal
in some particular country).
--
With best regards!
12:49 p.m.
On Saturday 13 December 2008 04:45:58 am Peter Lemenkov wrote:
Hello All!
2008/12/13, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>:
> > > The question is - who decided it. I wish to know whether rpmfusion is
> > > a community-driven project or not.
> >
> > Please read these:
> > http://rpmfusion.org/SteeringCommittee
>
> http://lists.fedoraunity.org/pipermail/repo-merge-discussion/2007-April/0
>00096.html
Understood - rpmfusion is not a community-project (important decisions
were made w/o asking community directly).
So, finally, what benefits rpmfusion provides over Livna? I see only
disadvantages (cannot include software, which someone claims illegal
in some particular country).
Well, rpmfusion will continue to do updates and new packages, while livna no
longer does (I don't think even new installs can get any package from livna).
That's an advantage for RPM fusion.
Regards,
--
Conrad Meyer <konrad(a)tylerc.org>
12:57 p.m.
2008/12/13 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com>:
Understood - rpmfusion is not a community-project (important
decisions
were made w/o asking community directly).
That is your PoV and it does not reflect, for example, my opinion.
BTW, I've always been a fan of who-does-much-of-the-work is more equal
than the others and who-has-the-legal-risk has the right to choose.
So, finally, what benefits rpmfusion provides over Livna? I see only
disadvantages (cannot include software, which someone claims illegal
in some particular country).
Hmm.... let me think...
RPM Fusion is a community, it has much more developers than Livna, it
has merged two other repositories, it has an open infrastructure, it
has much more packages than Livna. I don't think that any of these are
disadvantages.
Regards,
Andrea.
1:08 p.m.
Hello!
2008/12/13, Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com>:
--
With best regards!
BTW, I've always been a fan of who-does-much-of-the-work is more
equal
than the others and who-has-the-legal-risk has the right to choose.
So all we need is to change rpmfusion heads to those who live in more
freedom countries, right? There is a possibility to create and
maintain infrastructure in Russia, for example. Probably guys from the
indian Fedora community can do this too. I also don't hear any news
about DMCA repressions in Poland.
If someone thinks that he may be under legal attack, maybe he should
to leave the administration (not the contribution and development) of
rpmfusion.
> So, finally, what benefits rpmfusion provides over Livna? I see
only
> disadvantages (cannot include software, which someone claims illegal
> in some particular country).
Hmm.... let me think...
RPM Fusion is a community, it has much more developers than Livna, it
has merged two other repositories, it has an open infrastructure, it
has much more packages than Livna.
That's not a benefits (developers may easily switch back to work with
Livna, other repo may be merged with Livna as well, and so on).
BTW "more open infrastructure" means using cvs instead of svn? :)
1:24 p.m.
2008/12/13 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com>:
> RPM Fusion is a community, it has much more developers than
Livna, it
> has merged two other repositories, it has an open infrastructure, it
> has much more packages than Livna.
That's not a benefits (developers may easily switch back to work with
Livna, other repo may be merged with Livna as well, and so on).
Livna and Freshrpms are there just to supply libdvdcss. They do not
have any other purpose. So, why turning back? Aren't you trolling a
bit too much? It seemes that the only thing you care about is
libdvdcss. I haven't seen any other post of yours about something
else. Want to help? Package something :)
BTW "more open infrastructure" means using cvs instead of
svn? :)
No, the fact that we use an infrastructure that is open source and
resembles, where possible, the one Fedora has. Livna didn't.
Regards,
Andrea.
1:40 p.m.
Hello!
2008/12/13, Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com>:
Aren't you trolling a bit too much?
It seemes that the only thing you care about is libdvdcss.
Not only. I care about my freedom a little. Do you?
I haven't seen any other post of yours about something
That means that other things are OK for me.
else. Want to help? Package something :)
I' afraid that if some official in some country will claim, that
application "foobar" (and all its components) is illegal, then
RPMFusion heads will drop it asap. I mean I cannot trust (and work
with) people, living in totalitarian countries, because their
governments can easily pressurized on them (I know it, because I'm one
of the people in the opposition in Russia :).
--
With best regards!
1:29 p.m.
On 13.12.2008 14:08, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
2008/12/13, Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com>:
> BTW, I've always been a fan of who-does-much-of-the-work is more equal
> than the others and who-has-the-legal-risk has the right to choose.
So all we need is to change rpmfusion heads to those who live in more
freedom countries, right?
Nope, as some contributors will leave then as well. Livna for example
lost one major contributor (I'd say for some time in 2004 - 2006/2007 he
might have been one of two most important Livna contributors) due to
libdvdcss. I know of others that would considered to leave if RPM Fusion
starts to distribute libdvdcss.
And trust in the infrastructure is something very important as well --
that's for example why RPM Fusion does only accept builders that trusted
people run. I know people in non-US or -EU countries I'd trust, but
those might not be the ones that want to take care of a whole 3rd party
repo like RPM Fusion.
If someone thinks that he may be under legal attack, maybe he should
to leave the administration (not the contribution and development) of
rpmfusion.
Which then could result in a repo that can't serve the users needs, as
it lacks people that work on packages.
> > So, finally, what benefits rpmfusion provides over Livna? I
see only
> > disadvantages (cannot include software, which someone claims illegal
> > in some particular country).
> Hmm.... let me think...
> RPM Fusion is a community, it has much more developers than Livna, it
> has merged two other repositories, it has an open infrastructure, it
> has much more packages than Livna.
That's not a benefits (developers may easily switch back to work with
Livna, other repo may be merged with Livna as well, and so on).
Livna is dead -- the infra to maintain a big repo is afaik broken beyond
repair.
BTW "more open infrastructure" means using cvs instead of
svn? :)
Can't speak for Andrea, but CVS made a lot of things easier when
compared to Livna, as contributors are used to it from Fedora and
scripts and infra from Fedora can be reused.
Cu
knurd
8:12 p.m.
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Nope, as some contributors will leave then as well. Livna for
example
lost one major contributor (I'd say for some time in 2004 - 2006/2007 he
might have been one of two most important Livna contributors) due to
libdvdcss. I know of others that would considered to leave if RPM Fusion
starts to distribute libdvdcss.
But the decision not to distribute it might also end up driving away some
contributors, if it hasn't already.
Kevin Kofler
1:02 p.m.
On 13.12.2008 13:45, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
2008/12/13, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>:
>>> The question is - who decided it. I wish to know whether rpmfusion is
>>> a community-driven project or not.
>> Please read these:
>> http://rpmfusion.org/SteeringCommittee
> http://lists.fedoraunity.org/pipermail/repo-merge-discussion/2007-April/0...
Understood - rpmfusion is not a community-project (important decisions
were made w/o asking community directly).
It isn't the community that has to go to jail or pay if someone sues RPM
Fusion, it are the ones that are responsible for the repo and its hosting.
Cu
knurd
5:02 p.m.
--- On Sat, 12/13/08, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
I really hope this is the last time this is asked.
I only caught the last bits (just the last 2-3 months) of this ongoing discussion.
The answer might be trivial but I have a question: Can someone explain me what is the
difference between libdvdcss and lame (or any of the other packages we have in rpmfusion
that is patent encumbered) from a legal perspective? Why is lame OK, but libdvdcss is
not?
Cheers,
Orcan
5:05 p.m.
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
The answer might be trivial but I have a question: Can someone
explain me what is the difference between libdvdcss and lame (or any of the other packages
we have in rpmfusion that is patent encumbered) from a legal perspective? Why is lame OK,
but libdvdcss is not?
The issue with lame is patents.
libdvdcss goes beyond that.
-- Rex
5:35 p.m.
--- On Sat, 12/13/08, Rex Dieter wrote:
Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> The answer might be trivial but I have a question: Can
someone explain me what is the difference between libdvdcss
and lame (or any of the other packages we have in rpmfusion
that is patent encumbered) from a legal perspective? Why is
lame OK, but libdvdcss is not?
The issue with lame is patents.
libdvdcss goes beyond that.
Can you elaborate? I think if people know the root of this conflict, they won't
iterate this debate over and over.
-Orcan
6:10 p.m.
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
--- On Sat, 12/13/08, Rex Dieter wrote:
> The issue with lame is patents.
>
> libdvdcss goes beyond that.
Can you elaborate? I think if people know the root of this conflict, they won't
iterate this debate over and over.
maybe http://www.google.com/search?q=libdvdcss+legal+status can help
--
Gianluca Sforna
http://morefedora.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/gianlucasforna
7:18 a.m.
On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 21:14 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Andrea Musuruane wrote:
> I really hope this is the last time this is asked.
I think you know as well as me or everyone else what the only way this
question is going to stop being asked is.
No. This questions will only stopp, when
some court confirms or
disapproves the suspected legal threats.
5623
days inactive
5625
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
23 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Andrea Musuruane -
Conrad Meyer -
Gianluca Sforna -
Kevin Kofler -
Orcan Ogetbil -
Peter Lemenkov -
Ralf Corsepius -
Rex Dieter -
Thorsten Leemhuis