Re: CVS is the `released version'

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

"Robert J. Chassell" <bob@rattlesnake.com> writes:

>     rms> This might tempt redistributors (such as GNU/Linux distros)
>     rms> to add other repositories.  I don't want to ask for trouble.
>
>         Unfortunately this does not align very well with my goals in
>         writing package.el.  ... download and install ... the 3rd
>         party, unassigned code ...
>
> Since all software in the United States is copyrighted on creation,
> whether or not a copy of that code is sent to the copyright office,
> unless it is specifically said to be public domain, downloading and
> installing "3rd party, unassigned code" may mean `illegally using
> code'.  Most programs, of course, are never used illegally.  But a few
> may be.  This can be awkward.
>
> Doubtless, you are thinking of code that you or people you trust have
> checked for legality, but not every American does.

That sounds like making the tool responsible for the crime.  We are
not talking about something akin to "gun control" but rather to
"kitchen knife control".  The legitimate uses are much too farspread
that it makes sense blaming the tool for it.

And there is in particular no sense in banning a tool when that does
nothing to change the relative difficulty between legitimate and
illegitimate applications.

Anyway, we are not out to doing the government's work in shooting the
users in the foot.  We are bound by the laws, but we need not
proactively support them.

-- 
David Kastrup