Re: Sun Java available from non-free
Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Indeed, they will bear the *primary* liability. However if legal action
> > is taken against them or our mirror operators because of their decision,
> > the whole distribution process might suffer, affecting all developers
> > and users.
>
> Er, of course we all might be affected by it, but the ftpmasters would be
> affected *way* more by getting sued than *we* would be affected by their
> getting sued, so I think it's ridiculously presumptuous to criticize the
> ftpmasters for lack of transparency here instead of trying to support them
> to make good decisions.
Actually, the ftpmasters are unlikely to get sued, simply because they
probably don't have that much money. It is much more likely that
companies sponsoring parts of the mirror network would get sued
(e.g. Brainfood).
That puts a heavy burden upon the ftpmasters. Announcing an ITP and
referring questionable licenses to debian-legal relieves some of that
burden, because then the license is subjected to far greater analysis
by a larger group of people. Since the ftpmasters decided not to do
that, it is appropriate to complain about their ineptness in analysing
the license.
Cheers,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu
Reply to: