Illegal (e.g. patented) software in users home projects
Hi everyone, there are several users who are hosting packages like libx264 and libx265 in their home repositories. They do although it is clearly stated in https://en.opensuse.org/ openSUSE:Build_Service_application_blacklist[1] "This page lists a number of applications that neither can become part of openSUSE distribution **nor can be hosted** on the Build Service[2] for legal reasons." (emphasis mine) When pointed to the above page, often the users just give rude answers, and keep the packages. Apparently, the users are either not aware they put SUSE and the openSUSE project at risk, or they just do not care. Whats the best option here? Kind regards, Stefan -- Stefan Brüns / Bergstraße 21 / 52062 Aachen phone: +49 241 53809034 mobile: +49 151 50412019 -------- [1] https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_application_blacklist
On 2022/11/23 22:09, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am 24.11.22 um 01:36 schrieb Stefan Brüns:
there are several users who are hosting packages like libx264 and libx265 in their home repositories.Whats the best option here?
This is a topic for the build service ml - the rules are
such that the admins remove such packages if noticed. But they are not supposed to read the factory ml.
Greetings, Stephan
---- Illegal in what country? At least in the US, and I thought most other countries, I thought that the x264 format patent provided for free use by end-users, but not device manufacturers that used the encoding in a camera. I.e. HW manufacturers were required to pay a license fee on expected number of units, while end-users who used the codec to playback images were exempt from licensing fees. Wouldn't that type of license best be evaluated by those using it -- i.e. if a company used one of those libs and made an encoder program, they might be liable for paying the license fee, and certainly SuSE shouldn't offer any software builds that use those libs to encode videos. However I don't think the patents applied to the libraries themselves, only end-products. As long as suse doesn't include those libs in an encoding tool, that's shipped as part of the distribution, it shouldn't be a problem. I'd think the x265 patent would have similar licensing or it would have been a "fail" for use in the same context as x264. I'd just tell Tell those having the libs in their repos to move them to github and let someone else worry about these finer points.
On Fri, 2022-11-25 at 12:16 -0800, L A Walsh wrote:
On 2022/11/23 22:09, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am 24.11.22 um 01:36 schrieb Stefan Brüns:
there are several users who are hosting packages like libx264 and libx265 in their home repositories.Whats the best option here? This is a topic for the build service ml - the rules are
such that the admins remove such packages if noticed. But they are not supposed to read the factory ml.
Greetings, Stephan
Illegal in what country? At least in the US, and I thought most other countries, I thought that the x264 format patent provided for free use by end-users, but not device manufacturers that used the encoding in a camera.
IANAL and do not pretend to be one. The point is that SUSE legal have determined some packages to be blacklisted for a myriad of reasons, as you may see in the link Stefan provided. These packages should not (unless a future re-think from legal deems otherwise) be on OBS. P.S.: I have also sent a mail to the buildservice ML as suggested by Stephan. -- Atri
Am 25.11.22 um 21:16 schrieb L A Walsh:
Illegal in what country? At least in the US, and I thought most other
Illegal on OBS, see https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_application_blacklist
countries, I thought that the x264 format patent provided for free use by end-users, but not device manufacturers that used the encoding in a camera. I.e. HW manufacturers were required to pay a license fee on expected number of units, while end-users who used the codec to playback images were exempt from licensing fees.
Software patents are just incompatible with open source licenses because they discriminate users of the software - in doubt based on things you just listed. Greetings, Stephan
participants (4)
-
Atri Bhattacharya -
L A Walsh -
Stefan Brüns -
Stephan Kulow