Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> > What has this to do with non-US?
> > non-free: it isn't free, e.g. uses patented algorithms like LZW or IDEA
> No, non-free is stuff that you can't charge money for distributing, or
> has other weird licensing issues like no commercial use. Most
> everything in non-free can't be put on a CD and sold.
> Stuff that can't be distributed can't go in non-free, since non-free
> is distributed via network at the very least.
Policy section 2.1.4 says:
`Non-free' contains packages which are not compliant with the DFSG or
which are encumbered by patents or other legal issues that make their
All packages in `non-free' must be electronically distributable
across international borders.
Note: The first section mentions patents explicitely.
> > non-US: you are allowed to use it in both the US and outside, but you
> > aren't allowed to export it from the US because it contains
> > cryptographic code
> Also contains patent-encumbered code that is illegal to distribute
> from within the US.
> Since lame infringes on a German patent, it can't go in non-us either.
Policy section 2.1.5 says:
Some programs with cryptographic program code must be stored on the
"non-us" server because of export restrictions of the U.S.
This applies only to packages which contain cryptographic code. A
package containing a program with an interface to a cryptographic
program or a program that's dynamically linked against a
library can be distributed if it is capable of running without the
cryptography library or program.
Note: "This applies only to packages which contain cryptographic code."
A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
-- Mahatma Ghandi