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

Re: legal questions regarding machine learning models

On Wed, 27 May 2009 11:36:55 +0200 Mark Weyer wrote:

> Extremes: I do not agree with this classification of my view.
> I value a free game for the fact, that I can fool around with the source
> to make it "better". Adding features, levels, characters. If this means
> that I have to add long ears to some sprite (which is obviously generated
> from some 3D model), then I want to have access to that model and to the
> toolchain used to turn the model into the sprite. Because that is much
> more simple and robust, and creates a much more consistent set of sprite
> animation parts, than doing it with gimp on each part of each animation
> sequence individually. Free data is important for the very same reason
> that free programs are!

Exactly so.
I agree that this is the key aspect to take into account when talking
about this issue.

Unfortunately some people seem to think that getting more games (or
images, or music, or ...) is worth sacrificing the important
freedoms...  :-(

> What to do: As always it is a tradeoff between quantity and quality, in
> this case of packages. Maintaining a high freeness standard has an impact
> on the resources needed, so it limits the number of costly packages that
> you can support for any given amount of available resources.
> I value Debian because (and as long as) it puts the emphasis on freeness.

100 % agreement here.
I also think that Debian *should* value Freeness standards over the mere
quantity of packages in main.

> > PS:I'm CC'ing to the Debian Games Team mailing list.
> Done as well, but I am not subscribed to that list.

Same here: I am subscribed to debian-legal, but not to

 New location for my website! Update your bookmarks!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpBwuvNdZ5JK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: