Re: Non-US definition
Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Matt Kraai wrote: > > * it contains cryptographic program code which needed to be > >stored on a non-US server because of United States export > >restrictions, or > > This is no longer true. Uh, I agree that such packages no longer need to be in a non-US section. But this is the reason why the majority of such packages are there now, right (note the reason says `needed', not `need')? > > * it contains program code which needs to be stored on a non-US > >server because of United States patents. > > This is. What does this mean for users, ftp mirrors, and CD distributors in the United States? Can they legally use, mirror, or distribute such software therein? I also thought of another potential reason: * it contains program code which needs to be stored on a non-US server because of the DMCA. Are any packages in a non-US section for this reason? If not, are such packages allowed? Matt pgpwVpAuO0NNB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Non-US definition
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 12:26:20PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Matt Kraai wrote: > > * it contains cryptographic program code which needed to be > >stored on a non-US server because of United States export > >restrictions, or > This is no longer true. It is true for non-US/non-free. The exception that allows us to distribute cryptographic software from US mirrors does not extend to all software, and it's possible that some software whose license permits redistribution via non-free is not covered under this export exemption. I have seen no official endorsement given of merging non-US/non-free into the principal Debian mirror network. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgp84LWba4HTJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Non-US definition
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Previously Matt Kraai wrote: > > * it contains cryptographic program code which needed to be > >stored on a non-US server because of United States export > >restrictions, or > > This is no longer true. So how should people in like, France, act with regard to crypto? (I guess the answer is "check on a package-by-package basis".) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Non-US definition
Previously Matt Kraai wrote: > * it contains cryptographic program code which needed to be >stored on a non-US server because of United States export >restrictions, or This is no longer true. > * it contains program code which needs to be stored on a non-US >server because of United States patents. This is. Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Non-US definition
[I posted a similar message in late April, but since no one has responded, and I think this is an important issue, I'll try raising it again. If I'm missing something obvious, please let me know so I don't continue to make a fool of myself.] Howdy, I believe there are two possible reasons for a package to be in a non-US section: * it contains cryptographic program code which needed to be stored on a non-US server because of United States export restrictions, or * it contains program code which needs to be stored on a non-US server because of United States patents. Are these correct? Am I missing any reasons? Matt pgpegFf99FUUc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Non-US definition
Howdy, The package information page[1] contains the following description of the Non-US section: Non-US/Main and Non-US/Non-Free These packages cannot be exported from the USA, they are mostly encryption software packages, or software that is encumbered by patent issues. Most of them are free, but some are non-free. The CD FAQ[2] contains the following description: There are two variants of the binary-1 CD, one with and one without software of the "non-US" category. Non-US software may be imported into the US without problems, but exporting it from the US is forbidden by law (it contains strong cryptographic code). I suppose both of these will need to be updated once the crypto-in-main transition is complete. I am primarily concerned with the status of patent-encumbered software, however. May it be distributed within the USA? How does this avoid the patent problems? Matt 1. http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages 2. http://www.debian.org/CD/faq/ pgpKlwEs8V0ZD.pgp Description: PGP signature
