[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#420686: It's not obvious esniper is legal (violation of eBay ToS)



Package: esniper
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 2.2.3

[Cc:d to debian-legal]

Hi,

It's not obvious it is legal to distribute this software at all
(probably it either is fit for main or unfit for non-free too). I
suggest a review on debian-legal, since I'm not well versed in (at
least this area of) law. I found nothing about this in debian-legal
archives, so I assume it has not been discussed.

2.2.3 says "Packages must be placed in _non-free_ if they are not
compliant with the DFSG or are encumbered by patents or other legal
issues that make their distribution problematic." (I expected to find
something saying something about software that cannot be distributed
at all, but apparently it's not there, and all the language in other
sections seems very copyright and patent centric.)

eBay TOS (or "User Agreement" in eBay terms) says[1]:

------------------------------------------------------------
"_Access and Interference_

The Sites contains robot exclusion headers. Much of the information on
the Sites is updated on a real-time basis and is proprietary or is
licensed to eBay by our users or third parties. You agree that you
will not use any robot, spider, scraper or other automated means to
access the Sites for any purpose without our express written
permission.

Additionally, you agree that you will not:

[...]

- bypass our robot exclusion headers or other measures we may use to
prevent or restrict access to the Sites."
------------------------------------------------------------

	Sami


[1] http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/user-agreement.html

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.20.4-grsec-sli
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=fi_FI@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: