DISCLAIMER: The following isn't legal advice, I'm not your lawyer
(although I am A lawyer).
The script does contain numerous lines of code for the sole purpose of
installing proprietary software. For example, the Bioshock video game demo:
"w_metadata bioshock_demo games \
title="Bioshock Demo" \
publisher="2K Games" \
year="2007" \
media="download" \
file1="nzd_BioShockPC.zip" \
installed_exe1="$W_PROGRAMS_X86_WIN/2K Games/BioShock
Demo/Builds/Release/Bioshock.exe"
load_bioshock_demo()
{
if w_workaround_wine_bug 6971 "Setting mwo=force... please upgrade
to wine-1.3.23" 1.3.23,
then
w_call mwo=force
fi
w_download
http://us.download.nvidia.com/downloads/nZone/demos/nzd_BioShockPC.zip
7a19186602cec5210e4505b58965e8c04945b3cf
w_info "Unzipping demo, installer will start in about 30 seconds."
w_try unzip "$W_CACHE/$W_PACKAGE/nzd_BioShockPC.zip" -d
"$W_TMP/$W_PACKAGE"
cd "$W_TMP/$W_PACKAGE/BioShock PC Demo""
I can't see anything on the Hydra link that refers to FESCO's ruling.
Can you please link to that? Hydra itself is AGPLv3-or-later with an
OpenSSL linking exception (see
https://github.com/vanhauser-thc/thc-hydra/blob/master/LICENSE).
That autodownloader program is interesting but I don't think it's quite
identical. As I understand it, autodownloader provides a means to write
config files to automate downloading of software from the Internet. An
example is given of a proprietary game download config file, but that's
it. Any other downloads have to be manually configured by the end-user.
Winetricks, on the other hand, is just full of scripts for proprietary
software downloading, like the Bioshock example above.
Take care,
Adam Saunders, B.A., M.A. Phil., J.D.
Barrister and Solicitor
The Law Office of Adam Saunders
343 Preston Street, Unit 1150
Ottawa, Ontario
K1S 1N4
Tel: 613-317-1713
Fax: 613-703-1830
adamsaunders.ca
On 07/29/2015 10:45 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 2.1.2013 v 16:47 Tom Callaway napsal(a):
I would prefer we did not include this in Fedora, mainly because this
script potentially downloads a LOT of third-party stuff from a number of
different sources. Checking each item to ensure that the act of
providing a tool to directly and clearly download that item is not
causing legal concerns (specifically, contributory infringement) will
take a long time.
If you still want this in Fedora, I'd ask you to have FESCo consider it
with my concerns noted. If they think that the merits of this script
outweigh the time to do a full legal audit, then I will tackle it.
You can open a new FESCo ticket here:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/newticket
Resurecting this old thread, because this SW was packaged in Copr now.
And Leigh raised Legal Issue on this Copr.
So I have question:
* why providing a tool is/can be infringement. In past Fesco claimed that a tool itself is fine (e.g. hydra)
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/hydra
And in fact we have very similar tool in Fedora already:
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/autodownloader
* If this is not enough for Fedora, is it good for Copr? Or not?
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list
legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
