[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [games sig] Downloader for shareware data files for gpl engines such as vavoom

Hans de Goede (j w r degoede hhs nl) said: 
> >Someone building an OS on top of it may not qualify for the
> >'normal access fees' test.
> Someone building an OS on top would be in trouble with any freely 
> distributable content, as freely distributable != being able to build on 
> top of it. This thus seems a non argument as the guidelines talk about 
> "to freely distribute" wich clear != "to build a(n) XXXX on top of it"


If you can't build XXX on top of it and distribute it, that's not
freely distributable.

> Also releated but unanswered from my first reply:
> "Thus appearantly shareware data-files are ok content, due to the nature 
> of shareware (this is a limited version pay us for the full version) the 
> datafiles are almost by definition not for commercial use. (The rights 
> for commercial use is clearly reservered by the copyright, through the 
> full version and possible other versions)."
> Since there is a clear exception for shareware content (not code!) and 
> you've not shown any _distributing_ restrictions I believe that the 
> discussed content license is OK.

I'm saying I think the guidelines are *WRONG*. This exception seems

Warning, speaking solely for myself...

We're in the business here of promoting open source, and building
communities on top of that. Realisitcally, jumping through hoops
so we can ship what amounts to 10 year old games accomplishes
what, exactly? Promoting (essentially) shareware and old commercial
software? (See also: mame and similar emulators.)

Where I see an exception like this coming into play is for firmware
for wireless cards, and similar devices. And people should be able
to take whatever we include in Fedora, and build *whatever* on top
of it. An OS? Sure! A set top box? Why not? And *anything* that
is 'free for non-commercial use' prevents this.

Perhaps, it's just the day-of-freeze stress, but I don't think
going down this shareware (or similar) road is a good idea.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]