Status of ICQ-related apps in Fedora.

[Peter Lemenkov]

Hello All!

It seems, that *all* 3rd party software, which is should connect to
ICQ networks for normal operation, violates their EULA (or urges users
to violate EULA). Thus, keeping in mind, that there is no way to use
ICQ-related software w/o explicitly violating their license agreement,
and there are many other open alternatives (and even proprietary
systems, which permits 3rd party applications), I think that software,
designed to work with explicit requirement to be connected to ICQ
network, should be considered as unacceptable for inclusion into
Fedora (exept thiose titles, who has explicit permission from ICQ LLC
for connecting and interoperating with their network). Any opinions?

http://www.icq.com/legal/end-user-license.html

"You agree not to (1) create or use any software other than the
Software provided by ICQ or by America Online, Inc., or any affiliate
thereof, to enter your ICQ number and password or to access the ICQ
Services, without the express written authorization of ICQ; (2)
extract information from the ICQ Services, reverse engineer,
decompile, disassemble, alter, duplicate, make copies, create
derivative works from, distribute or provide others with the Software,
the ICQ communications protocol or any information available on,
derived or extracted from the ICQ Services, or any part thereof; (3)
block, disable or otherwise affect any advertising, advertisement
banner window, links to other sites and services, or other features
that constitute an integral part of the Software and ICQ Services; (4)
connect, use, attempt to connect or use in any way the ICQ Services,
for any commercial purpose and any other purpose that is not for your
private personal use in good faith and as explicitly offered on the
ICQ Web site; and (5) incorporate, integrate or otherwise include the
Software or any portion thereof (including the ICQ communications
protocols) into any software, program or product that communicates,
accesses, or otherwise connects with the ICQ Service or any other
instant messaging, Internet, or online service."

-- 
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 10:05:40 +0400,
  Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hello All!
>  
>  It seems, that *all* 3rd party software, which is should connect to
>  ICQ networks for normal operation, violates their EULA (or urges users
>  to violate EULA). Thus, keeping in mind, that there is no way to use
>  ICQ-related software w/o explicitly violating their license agreement,
>  and there are many other open alternatives (and even proprietary
>  systems, which permits 3rd party applications), I think that software,
>  designed to work with explicit requirement to be connected to ICQ
>  network, should be considered as unacceptable for inclusion into
>  Fedora (exept thiose titles, who has explicit permission from ICQ LLC
>  for connecting and interoperating with their network). Any opinions? 
I can't see allowing just code that ICQ allows as that seems like it would
be non-free.
This sounds a lot like the glider case where the creator got sued for
interfering with the contract between Blizzard and its customers.

[R P Herrold]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 5 May 2010, Peter Lemenkov wrote:

>  It seems, that *all* 3rd party software, which is should connect to
>  ICQ networks for normal operation, violates their EULA (or urges users
>  to violate EULA). 
    ...
>  Any opinions? 
more a matter of 'politics', rather than legal

This is a slippery slope.  Fedora has no mandate to be a 
private contractual analysis or enforcement venue (I think 
...)

'vetting' software license terms for freedom is one thing; 
avoiding affirmative legal (of matters of governmentally 
promulgated law) prohibitions ... here, patent, trademark, 
copyright

I am not aware of a general governmentally imposed legal duty 
to ** not ** publish software that MIGHT be use to act in a 
way a matter of 'private law' [here: a contract]

One cannot know all laws of all jurisdictions of the world. 
Red Hat as the owner of the Fedora project ultimately will 
override any call that might get it subject to liability 
within the jurisdictions it operates. (one assumes ...)

Even more tellingly, one cannot begin know all possible 
contracts purporting to govern or impair actions by third 
parties.  To try to do so leads to 'analysis paralysis' and 
simply never doing anything.  The prior para. as to Red Hat's 
ability to protect itself and its actions applies here as well

If a person signing the Fedora CLA is uncomfortable 
proceeding, they need to opt of participating

But really, a lay person has to decide for themself, possibly 
with the advice of counsel.

This venue, it seems to me, has to not open up the infinite 
alleys of playing lawyer and 'enforcing' private contract 
pairings beyond statutory prohibition or 'tortious' [asserted 
wrongful acts, not arising our of contract] conduct.

- ---------------start disclaimer-------------------

I_A_AL, but not your lawyer.  I offer legal advice and formal
opinion only within the confines of a previously  established 
and explicit attorney-client relationship where privilege may 
be had;  and NEVER on a public list server.

- ----------------end disclaimers ------------------

As I say, a slippery slope, and a personal actions 
('body politic') question rather than a 'fedora-legal' one (I 
think)

- -- Russ herrold

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFL4XbkMRh1QZtklkQRAs0YAKChMXptTO3/688GXYx7AXF76x2RsgCdHj8l
> 9H24YHssfzdzSK2maluN6vo=
> =2x7Q
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----