| 1 |
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 13:22, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 08 October 2003 21:22, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote: |
| 3 |
> > -- Will this licence check now serve as the default method of handling |
| 4 |
> > EULA's for future licenced games? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I'm wondering about this for all software. In my installation and upgrade |
| 7 |
> of Gentoo, I've never seen anything telling me that I have to accept X |
| 8 |
> license to use Y software. If there has been, it has been barely noticable. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I think that forcing users to accept licenses is a Good Thing. Once a |
| 11 |
> license is accepted it should not be reconfirmed for every piece of |
| 12 |
> software that falls under it, of course. However, I do think that at a |
| 13 |
> minimum a banner should be shown stating what license a piece of software |
| 14 |
> falls under. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Regards, |
| 17 |
> Jason |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Why is the license important to the average user? The license can't take away |
| 20 |
any rights given to you by law. The only time the average user needs to |
| 21 |
concern themselves with a license is where the license grants them extra |
| 22 |
rights - the most important one concerning gentoo is allowing redistribution, |
| 23 |
which would otherwise by prohibited by copyright law. Unless you are running |
| 24 |
a gentoo mirror, or actually developing for the code in question, the license |
| 25 |
is mostly irrelevant. Besides, there are hundreds of licenses in |
| 26 |
/usr/portages/licenses, do you really want to have to click y for every |
| 27 |
single one? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives