| 1 |
On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 01:34:37PM +0200, Jon Lech Johansen wrote: |
| 2 |
> Explicit permission from the copyright owner is required to legally |
| 3 |
> redistribute: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Yes, but don't forget the reason for copyright to be there in the |
| 6 |
first place; to protect the investment and make sure that you can make |
| 7 |
money of that investment in the future. I think that by putting |
| 8 |
something on the web for free download, without putting any |
| 9 |
restrictions on it, they've made it clear that they don't mind if |
| 10 |
these codecs are spread further. Not the same as, but quite similar |
| 11 |
to, email and Usenet postings. Note how many companies, including |
| 12 |
Microsoft and Apple, /do/ put restrictions on nearly everything else |
| 13 |
they publish on the web. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If they did have any comments on gentoo mirroring their codecs, I |
| 16 |
think that your initial letters to their legal deparments would have |
| 17 |
atleast generated some response other than total silence. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Anyways, I doubt my gentoo-mirror is any faster than the Microsoft / |
| 20 |
Apple sites, so I wouldn't exactly weep if portage downloaded the |
| 21 |
codecs from those sites instead of the mirror. ;) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Oh, if only the world would've been run by people with common sense[1] |
| 24 |
instead of lawyers... ;) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
//H |
| 27 |
[1] Not that I'm known as an abundant source of 'common sense'. |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
To segfault is human; to bluescreen moronic. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives