[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout

Tue Dec 21 08:31:21 CET 2010

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 04:47:07AM -0500, Ernest N. Wilcox Jr. wrote:
+> | >ands, or buts, about it. If the Mageia community chooses to opeate as a 
+> | >criminal organization, I will have nothing to do with it.
+> | I don't agree on most of the above, and i believe the last sentence to be
+> | offensive, but i will not retaliate lest it becomes a flame war.
+>
+>I do not see how that statement is offensive. It is a simple statement of fact. 
+I am not really sure about US laws, but in some country, like mine there
+are two very distinct law body criminal law, and civil law.
+So here the term "criminal organizations" leads to think of things
+like mafia, large scale drug dealers, murderers etc. And i loathe to be
+included in the same group.
+>The variety of laws that exist is not the issue, the fact that they do exist 
+>is, and this is why I think PLF is a good place for "questionable" software. 
+It really is. As Romain pointed out the sum of every law in the world
+might result in an empty environment.
+(silly real world example)
+In some countries it is illegal for women to wear a bourka in public
+In some countries it is illegal for women _not_ to wear a bourka in
+public.
+Now how would you please both? besides my personal belief being women
+should be allowed to wear anything they chose and not be judged for that
+(and please if what i said is criminal, then call me that)
+
+>main Mageia distribution. I have no problem with such software being 
+>distributed where it is legal. I simply want to make it easy for end users and 
+>miror hosts to exclude this software where it is illegal. I will not enter 
+This is the object, but it cannot be achieved 100%.
+1) What about if a particulary restrictive country mandates that all
+communication software shall contain a mean for the government to
+eavesdrop such communication? shall we move ssl to plf?
+2) Not infringing on any patent would require enormous effort, just to
+list every possible patent, not to speak of analyzing every software to
+ensure it does not do anything covered by a patent.
+
+>into the argument that it is not illegal untill the patent holder comes after 
+>you. To my way of thinking, that feels very similar to saying that stealing is 
+>not a crime untill you get caught.
+NO
+First, single patents are not laws
+Second, iirc your law requires patent holders to prove the validity of
+their patent in trial. this is the exact opposite of catching a thief.
+It is the patent holder that has to prove the property was his before
+claiming damage.
+
+L.
+
+P.S. I do not like the word 'tainted' for this kind of repository
+because it just encourages parallels with theft like Ernest is making
+here.
+
+L.
+
+-- 
+Luca Berra -- bluca at vodka.it
+