Re: mpeg encoder patents, Was: Bug#501190: ITP: moonlight
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 05:54:22PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 October 2008 16:44, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > - packages in 'patented' must fulfill the requirements of the dfsg
> I dont think we should support the obsolete, useless & wrong patent system by
> doing this.
If we're going to ignore patent-based liabilities altogether, then let us
be vocal about it and issue an official statement (read: GR-backed) with
As long as we don't, if we include a certain package that is widely believed
to be patent-encumbered, we're sending a message claiming that it is not. I
don't appreciate the Moonlight folks trying to use Debian for this purpose.
Whatever the choice is, let us at least be consistent...
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."