[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout

Fri Dec 10 21:15:40 CET 2010

nicolas vigier a écrit :
+>
+> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010, Wolfgang Bornath wrote:
+>
+>> 2010/12/10 Romain d'Alverny<rdalverny at gmail.com>:
+>>>
+>>> Ok, but you still take into account SP in your answer. :-p (we would
+>>> have come to that, but the idea was to think about it from a naïve,
+>>> software-patent-free perspective).
+>>
+>> If there were no software patents anywhere what would be the issue of
+>> this discussion?
+>> IMHO it makes no sense to discuss something which does not exist
+>>
+>> If Mageia were a project fro French users only we would no have this
+>> discussion. But as it is a worldwide project the probelm exists and
+>> pretending it does not makes no sense, not even from a theoretical
+>> POV. because the theoretical POV is "No SP, no discussion".
+>>
+>> Ok, anyway.
+>>
+>> I see the strategy in your proposition but:
+>>
+>> 1. We know from the start that there ARE packages with software which
+>> is patented in some countries. So, the "let's start empty and see what
+>> comes up" is already done with.
+>
+> Being patented does not mean that patent is valid and enforceable.
+
+We should remember that patents are a civil right accorded by rules 
+differing from country to country.  Many countries don't offer patents 
+on software.
+Patent holders have to use the courts to enforce these rights, who often 
+deny or limit patent holder's claims.
+So in addition to any theoretical rights of software patent holders, 
+there is the consideration "is it worth the money and effort for the 
+potential gain in royalties" ?
+In that, free software (in both senses) has a considerable advantage 
+compared to other parties who could be considered in infringement of 
+software patents.
+
+>> 2. In some countries mirror maintainers can not wait until somebody
+>> raises his hand, there are lawyers who write nice "cease and desist"
+>> letters, attached is a bill you have to pay. In Germany this is called
+>> "Kostenpflichtige Abmahnung"  and has grown to a habit of some
+>> lawyers.
+>> Meaning: you can't wait and see what happens, you have to make sure
+>> that it does not happen from the start.
+
+"cease and desist" letters are just warnings.  Any attached "bill" would 
+only have effect if validatated by a court.
+As I understand, lawyers have the same habit in the U.S.
+Wouldn't the amounts accorded be based on the supposed benefit that the 
+supposed violator has received ?  (At least that is part of the equation 
+in the U.S.)
+
+And how does that translate for free software ?
+In the U.S., software patent holders have avoided attacking targets 
+without a lot of financial resources.
+The only Linux-associated target I recall is Novell.
+Mpeg patents are pursued, but the several PLF mirrors in the U.S., with 
+openly indicated patented packages, are ignored.
+
+>> I mean, opinions about software patents set aside for a minute,
+>> software patents are protected by official law in those countries. You
+>> can not break the law on the basis of "let's see what happens".
+
+Again, this is not "breaking the law", but potentially infringing on a 
+civil right.  Which must be validated by the courts.
+
+> The problem is that we don't know for sure if we violate the law. We
+> should not be too paranoid about this. Microsoft claims that the Linux
+> kernel violates 235 of their patents :
+> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/index.htm
+> Should we trust them and remove the kernel from the core repository ?
+
+Yes indeed.  Off to "tainted" we go :) :) :)
+
+> I'm wondering how much mirror admins are concerned about patent issues.
+
+In the U.S., not much, and with reason.  Not even the PLF mirror sites 
+there are pursued.
+Which is convenient for us in Canada : often the closest mirror is 
+across the border.
+
+> If we split the packages between core and "tainted" repositories, how
+> many will filter it ?
+
+We all know that packagers don't have enough work.  Don't we ? ;)
+
+> If only a few will do it, maybe it's not really
+> worth it and we can still have enough mirrors. It seems that Debian has
+> mirrors in many countries, while hosting patented software in its main
+> repository.
+
+Including the U.S.
+Interesting that Debian discussions about patent issues seem to focus on 
+what will be accepted in U.S. mirrors.  Who have yet to be impacted on 
+patent issues.
+It seems that the few spectactular cases against rich players in the 
+U.S. has distorted the perception of the legal reality there.
+
+- André
+