From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix Subject: bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 01:02:26 +0100 Message-ID: <874kyoamwd.fsf@nckx> References: <87d0df7wpv.fsf@gnu.org> <877e3lkpv9.fsf@web.de> Reply-To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55634) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ia7H0-0003FN-KD for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:03:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ia7Gy-0002qe-Bv for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:03:06 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50424) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ia7Gw-0002pS-Bk for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:03:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ia7Gw-0004wT-7L for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:03:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: <877e3lkpv9.fsf@web.de> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: 38360@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Guix, This is not about Schr=C3=B6dinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent=20 binary. The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked=20 as non-free in Debian: libretro-genesisplusgx libretro-snes9x Disabling the Updater seems like an open & shut case to me. This is a shame, because I think these non-commercial clauses are=20 silly and legally void. Core authors can't place arbitrary=20 restrictions on derivative works of a GPL3 project.=20 Unfortunately, that obvious fact is for a court to point out, and=20 until then we must act as if it makes any sense. Arne, to address your last point first: Arne Babenhauserheide =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a=20 > long list > of possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do=20 > the > online-lookup. For the purpose of this (FSDG) discussion, that's exactly what=20 =E2=80=98advertised=E2=80=99 means. I install Retroarch with Guix. When I run Retroarch, it prods me=20 to (literally) =E2=80=98use the Updater if available=E2=80=99. When I do t= hat, I=20 can select from many cores, at least two of them non-free. There is no way for me to know this important fact; I have to type=20 the name of the core into a search engine and dig, possibly deep=20 (not everyone knows the awesome power of a Debian copyright file=20 :-). You're not required to agree with any of the above, but Guix must. > We=E2=80=99re not restricting software which displays non-free online=20 > comics > either. Indeed, that would be against our stated goal of user freedom. Comics aren't software so don't count, but take Linux-Libre: the=20 fact that it refuses to load non-free firmware supplied by the=20 user is a *bug*, and even upstream acknowleges this. IceCat is=20 another obvious example. Same with Retroarch: if the user has a non-free core Guix's=20 Retroarch must, IMPO, run it. The difference is that at no point do Linux-Libre or IceCat ask me=20 to =E2=80=98visit our cool firmware shoppe!=E2=80=99. Indeed, the FF =E2= =80=98Get New=20 Add-ons=E2=80=99 button that directly advertises non-free software is=20 disabled for that reason. > Aren=E2=80=99t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program=20 > restricted > to push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a=20 > program > restricted to not-for-profit for everybody. It's just as bad for the same reason. Like proprietary licences,=20 this one restricts redistribution *and* use of the software: =E2=80=9CPermission to use, copy, modify and/or distribute Snes9x in=20 both binary and source form, for non-commercial purposes, is hereby granted=20 without fee [=E2=80=A6] Snes9x is freeware for PERSONAL USE only.=E2=80=9D That violates a fundamental software freedom (#0: the freedom to=20 run the software as you wish, for any purpose). Contrast this with the GPL, which places zero restrictions on use=20 =E2=80=94 I don't even have to share the software or my improvements with=20 anyone! > It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM=20 > without > the option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it=20 > on that > medium, including the propagator. I don't see any similarities. With any GPL3 software, I am always=20 allowed to copy the software and do with it what I want, no matter=20 the underlying storage at some point in time. Kind regards, T (not a lawyer but talks to them at parties when no one else=20 will) G-R --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEfo+u0AlEeO9y5k0W2Imw8BjFSTwFAl3fDpIACgkQ2Imw8BjF STzObhAAiEAVdk7LQO4jyErEniolP6KtHHiXisr477gOaO8i9ek5EDcDRjdIWnMi X9fLfROiSuThCODfJiYQE8JAc0DoESAmLDwPvwK+GAQBNbX2zZegRFyLwOYBF5cX 5sk56FgvslxNuKRHRxhuIPyy3abGUQf0yeW6o3RWSor5UhtC//hiNIBqdQVDjseQ 874ZrTAxq/IzkEflnOppYFXHHhJQGDZYQtfhhje0/DlVXWel4+udDQN7Dm8mkFSh 9MPllrLsBIl1yUSHcXqHzD/7eUvXUJF3mveEbc+kbYBz/xHaP5pYBFmA3SjprWeF j6i8ZUT3om15cXsYTMXgYaxFM/Nlkb6zmuQk41MiXO5ocQhNDYtvohLw3FGREM3o 5vRmmmRVcSsAdXM5r4Fx2pTm0ABlO+sUOeFbT5UjDi6wWQw3IzJCfYWnkK3rK5hy 4MEQlDjXcu0osLI0/CHnd5d+LeIvwA226EPWwNXDdXwVp3gYEpok6s0r0408nyhp 9A9GvTOK+MscSNxHvK3F3FJgqmptLxNCR/uxInIJZyvOaKn1rSpO7xEQn6KI4xed mJ4ao+pLxdhPCvtUYCWSJgH4Dn0D1bqEi8Fxu8WsgMe7DyvBkM6ytAsBS47Ggsrw lbu692IZBvR/W531ehfp2d56f/Ey/gyGJL3Sj1ysF4LioiqznCc= =g7+F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--