At 11:11 PM 1/22/2010 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> In order to make it clear that PyPI data may only be mirrored
> for redistribution with PSF authorization, we need to add proper
> notices to PyPI and also prevent such mirroring technically
> (if possible).
However, I don't think this is factually the case: *anybody*
can indeed mirror the data in any way they like. This is how
it is, and how it should be.
Indeed. And if we are talking about mirroring the contents of the
/simple index, there is no intellectual property there for PSF to
claim copyright on. (At least in the U.S., where it's well
established that you can't copyright a list of names and phone
numbers... and a list of links that isn't creatively arranged or
generated by a human editor is very likely in the same category.)
That doesn't mean you can't use clickwrap agreements and such, but
really, trademark dilution and tarnishment are the kinds of laws that
are specifically designed to address the kinds of problems that
"evil" mirrors would cause. Adding an "Official PyPI Content" mark
to the PSF's trademarks and establishing usage requirements around
the mark is probably a more fruitful path than seeking technical
solutions to an essentially social/legal problem.
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
