On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Ahmad Samir wrote:
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.
Perhaps we should call it cya, then. :)
Dale Huckeby
