On 8 December 2010 11:39, Wolfgang Bornath <molc...@googlemail.com> wrote: > 2010/12/8 Ahmad Samir <ahmadsamir3...@gmail.com>: >> >> For Fedora, being the most legally-challenged distro around, they >> don't include any patented software in their official repos at all, >> not even mp3 playback is possible in a default install. They even >> don't include any non-free stuff, so no nVidia and ATI proprietary >> drivers. Fedora users use some 3rd party repos, e.g. RPM Fusion >> http://rpmfusion.org/ > > Thx, so it's the same as with Mandriva wrt patented software. > What I wanted to say: distributing no patented software at all is not > the same as "having no extra repository for patented software", so are > Mandriva and Fedora seen as "justifying patent sharks" as andre999 > descibed it? > > -- > wobo >
Reality has proven that some users do use patented software, coming from a semi-official repo or a 3rd party one doesn't seem to matter; i.e. some Mandriva users use PLF (and/or others), some Fedora they use RPM Fusion (and/or others), some OpenSuse users use PackMan; and Debian has a non-US repo... etc The whole point is, it's a CYA (cover your a**) situation; just because a law suit isn't filed doesn't mean it won't/can't be filed. -- Ahmad Samir