Scott, am Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 10:07:28AM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben: > The current goal for the Ubuntu archive is to prevent distribution of content > which Canonical and the mirror providers don't have legal authorization to > distribute. Changing from a proactive verification model (which is what we > use > now, although it relies generally on self assertions in the code so it's > imperfect) to a reactive model where code is considered distributable based > on > a third party assertion until someone complains seems like a very substantial > change.
I think that's also because we ask people to mirror stuff that Debian (and by extension Ubuntu) does proactive checks. > IANAL either, but this seems risky to me. At the very least, I'd suggest > engaging them early to make sure they are comfortable with the concept of not > checking (new work item) and you'll need to figure out how you'll deal with > take down requests (another new work item). If it turns out applications > have > been distributed illegally, do you intend a way to remotely remove them? I don't think there is any requirement to remotely remove such content (except if it's malicious, maybe). On the contrary I think people would be yelling at you, especially if they paid for the content (c.f. Amazon). For Android you mainly risk your sign-up fee given that with every upload you state that you have the necessary rights. If the distribution point ceases to distribute the 3rd party content when he's made aware of a violation that seems to be fair. However that wouldn't work go along well with mirroring this repository. Kind regards Philipp Kern
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
