On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 13:55 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 13:32 -0400, Christopher Blizzard wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 09:53 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > > Honestly, I think all of these comments come from one pivotal issue: > > > > > > Fedora won't break US law. > > > > > > Debian will. Ubuntu will. SuSE will. Gentoo will. > > > > > > Thus, there is no need for "extra" repositories to arise for these Linux > > > distributions. And the average user wants to have software that breaks > > > the law (mp3, dvd, etc). So they have to go outside the safety zone that > > > is the distribution for Fedora, and here there be dragons. > > > > > > This problem sucks. It has always sucked. We're playing by the rules, > > > where no one else is, and we're getting punished for it, while they > > > prosper. > > > > > > The rules (US law) are broken. I just have no idea how to fix it in my > > > lifetime, much less in the period of relevance for Fedora. > > > > Is there a reason why we don't say this widely? It's a compelling and > > simple to understand meme (free/non-free/illegal/illegal aside.) > > Because we'd be accusing other groups of breaking the law. Thats > potentially libel. I doubt Red Hat wants to take that kind of risk, > whereas I am personally willing (I've got a pretty strong case that > they're violating US patent law and the DMCA, and while I'd be more than > happy to see these laws repealed, they're still the laws on the books). That's easy to flip around into a positive personal assertion: "We don't do it because we feel it risks breaking the law and we can't impose that risk on our users, either." --Chris _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
