Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (317 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-project] Music distro
- From: Bryen M Yunashko <suserocks@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:46:12 -0600
- Message-id: <1327362372.2926.56.camel@linux-sl6g>
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 23:32 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:
I think you've done a good job of summarizing the issues and I think
your opinion is a pretty solid one.
But the question is still begged as to whether this is truly something
to stop us from moving forward with a music distro. SUSE Studio *does*
include the Packman repo. Surely such risks must have been taken into
consideration. (or maybe it wasn't.)
Maybe Studio guys figured it was okay to use Packman, but only if you
don't make it publicly available via the Gallery? Or only if the
builder makes sure to not include patent-infringing packages regardless
of public or private consumption. (But how does the average builder
know which package is "verboten"?)
I guess, given the current constraints, we would also have to warn our
own community not to distribute CDs of the new "openSUSE Music" spin at
events in the United States or other similarly-challenged countries.
I'm becoming more and more curious to hear how these are worked around
and what discussions come up during the Linux Audio Conference in
California. Luckily, our very own Peter Linnell (MrDocs) is planning to
attend this conference and share details with us.
In the meantime, I'd like to hear from a SUSE Studio guy who has
reviewed/addressed the potential complications and hear what SUSE Studio
determined is allowable/dis-allowable. Hopefully someone will chime in
soon.
Bryen M Yunashko
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
My personal opinion on this, which I believe is rather
qualified, is that it is *NOT* possible to build an openSUSE
spin with SUSE Studio that contains packages that potentially
infringe on software patents, for the simple reason that no
somewhat larger business would want to take the risk to host it
on its infrastructure (specifically, the risk of being sued for
distributing software that uses patented algorithms without
paying royalties for the right of using them).
If it was okay to have openSUSE spins that include such packages
on SUSE Studio, then it would also be okay to package those
packages on build.opensuse.org. And it isn't.
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's accurate.
I think you've done a good job of summarizing the issues and I think
your opinion is a pretty solid one.
But the question is still begged as to whether this is truly something
to stop us from moving forward with a music distro. SUSE Studio *does*
include the Packman repo. Surely such risks must have been taken into
consideration. (or maybe it wasn't.)
Maybe Studio guys figured it was okay to use Packman, but only if you
don't make it publicly available via the Gallery? Or only if the
builder makes sure to not include patent-infringing packages regardless
of public or private consumption. (But how does the average builder
know which package is "verboten"?)
I guess, given the current constraints, we would also have to warn our
own community not to distribute CDs of the new "openSUSE Music" spin at
events in the United States or other similarly-challenged countries.
I'm becoming more and more curious to hear how these are worked around
and what discussions come up during the Linux Audio Conference in
California. Luckily, our very own Peter Linnell (MrDocs) is planning to
attend this conference and share details with us.
In the meantime, I'd like to hear from a SUSE Studio guy who has
reviewed/addressed the potential complications and hear what SUSE Studio
determined is allowable/dis-allowable. Hopefully someone will chime in
soon.
Bryen M Yunashko
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |