On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 9:00 AM Gary Buhrmaster
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 9:29 PM Vitaly Zaitsev <vitaly(a)easycoding.org> wrote:
> We can't ship RPM Fusion because it contains patent-encumbered and
> proprietary software, right? But at the same time, we can ship Flathub
> which contains the same software. I can't understand that.
Last I knew, rpmfusion also ships software which includes
software for which the repo does not have redistribution
rights(*), and software whose primary purpose is for dmca
While the issue of patent encumbrances is related, these
are also different considerations for which counsel will
need to render their advice in terms of acceptability.
Given the large variation across jurisdictions regarding
IP laws/regulations, the answer is often not clear cut
or obvious to those not steeped into the depths of IP law
(and, of course, two different lawyers might come to
subtly different recommendations from the same set of
(*) As I recall, packagers for flathub must be able
to show redistribution rights, or download the related
files via an alternative mechanism (which flathub
does provide a mechanism to accomplish during
(**) And this gets into weeds about redistribution of
such software vs simply using such software, and
whether referencing/linking to such content is an
issue. Which may also vary between jurisdictions.
This is also a bit murky with Flathub, as the download doesn't happen
on the local user's side with extra-data-download, it happens in
Flathub and repacks it server-side. That means Flathub is doing
redistribution. I can see a few examples where this is obviously problematic.
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!