From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arne Babenhauserheide Subject: bug#38360: Retroarch might violate FSDG Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 09:05:51 +0100 Message-ID: <87eexs2zog.fsf@web.de> References: <87d0df7wpv.fsf@gnu.org> <877e3lkpv9.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40322) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iaEv6-0007kS-T4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 03:13:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iaEpK-0006FO-O8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 03:07:04 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50582) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iaEpK-0006F0-Ki for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 03:07:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iaEpK-00028U-Fa for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 03:07:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: 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: =?UTF-8?Q?Nicol=C3=B2?= Balzarotti Cc: 38360@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nicol=C3=B2 Balzarotti writes: >> Aren=E2=80=99t we overblocking here? This is not a case of a program res= tricted >> to push someone into proprietary software, but a case of a program >> restricted to not-for-profit for everybody. >> > This is, by (some) definition, non free. Yes. >> It is a similar case as allowing to ship GPLv3 software in a ROM without >> the option to modify it, as long as no one is able to modify it on that >> medium, including the propagator. >> > >> In the case of snes9x no one is able to monetize the software, including >> the creators, because many people have a stake in the non-commercial >> clause, but the software is freely modifiable and you can share it >> non-commercially. >> >> It is also not advertised (I just tried) but simply one in a long list >> of possible cores. A very long list. And you have to actively do the >> online-lookup. >> >> We=E2=80=99re not restricting software which displays non-free online co= mics >> either. >> > Comics aren't software. Free as in Freedom can apply only to software, AF= AIK It can apply to non-software, see for example the Wikipedia and Stackoverflow. I experience that regularly since I=E2=80=99m writing a GPL-licensed roleplaying book: it uses graphics from Battle For Wesnoth, under GPL, and getting cc by-sa GPL-compatible was a major pain point for many years -> https://www.draketo.de/english/free-software/by-sa-gpl >> Installing the fastest and most compatible free software cores by >> default (pre-installed) would minimize the effect of cores bound to >> non-commercial use being available online without restricting the users >> in using RetroArch =E2=80=94 and it would make retroarch more convenient= to use. > > If I understand correctly (i.e. shipping free cores with our retroarch > distribution, while still allowing non-free software download from the > software), I half-way agree with you. However, IMO, we should not encoura= ge > the use of non free software, at all. Those non-free cores available in o= ne > click, and a user might not even know that 1. s/he is downloading some ki= nd > of software and 2. that this software is non-free (no license details). Looking at the interface *if you have some cores installed* it first presents those cores and only afterwards says "download core". And for available cores there=E2=80=99s actually a license entry (but that currently says N/A =E2=80=94 which looks like a bug to me). So while there is no license in the listing, you are presented with the license before running a core. > I was upset in discovering that I downloaded a non-free core, and I > realized just because of the ".so.zip" name. If upstream they change > the name to "core.zip", future users might not even understand what > they are doing. The .so file ending is already something that takes domain knowledge to recognize. But not from the domain of the program: The domain of the program are emulators and roms. For these "this uses a core for the specified hardware" is pretty clear. > Finally, in a purely reproducible interest, having random software > downloaded is just bad. I agree in principle but not in practice, because we also ship npm, pip, gem, package.el, cargo, maven, =E2=80=A6 Best wishes, Arne =2D- Unpolitisch sein hei=C3=9Ft politisch sein ohne es zu merken --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE801qEjXQSQPNItXAE++NRSQDw+sFAl3ff+EACgkQE++NRSQD w+sO6g//UJXvp1rtiQf0AjIEJ1+MLqK1z8vVUvKMwpdoo2/x+T8U/Uz/iiKH9+TF wWx+nEaPogJ19rLtSgxpVCn9WGqijdRY21KWT/AdKMhxqY6Wc1E+PKvswfpCfNtR 2D2XJhYdUckQCCWgee8myli9mazC8mrj2tHTDpmKE24pVgv0A0ltCOpwDZIvsJk6 U/pf2GCAcB5dnblVD0nvQleqkDufkLzsY8y6Aj4oIeQJZ/3pClmlXkZpZlBgHM1V BhbJT0Hq7OrqYiUvjKW00/wIv9NAbBnXuAE6oXb9cJQlU5q9BL72cBEuQCWk5xTz K7sVCpjDLQETCyQFf3LrOTATNkr0MFrmFGBDRxx6smxwohBsmTcPnVYNhbl42kt8 C+cXv3jkTXqd5CvzRBkjErd0J2fpjiPxl0zH4b2hD0R9W5gJkc0JzTJAxKVWG+ML B3JNreEzho3Ei2igoMw20RJwZu1aRCEcWMmeoMZUwra4bAK8b6UdmRcpDlW9LzPW ZodGOVGxNwzcj2rhJJwiRjIiSkZK80O5BGZPVor+D+sVv09fJm655UH6yBBxoIUx RKotVfCnvPwuiINq0LLKAHCZwEKRV6zV/6t7jIflRwaDjQM9LBmhQa7BvoRUZGLN 5dQuF21npeYRjNiFT1G7IjyQWa4PijPe84+D3GrmX2b0wt3zM+yIswQBAQgAHRYh BN0ovebZh1yrzkqLHdzPDbMLwQVIBQJd33/lAAoJENzPDbMLwQVI0DwD/jV0GXmY o/GWZF3C5FUJ7F8xI8+hyUa+oCXUVrJVgMy3WGM3UEEWPyg1CLvFH9H8PNG8u71D 0t/sLbX8QO1dp/WqWEZRofGOik/03m7Z6dTBtbJf+5CTmeFnIK7LVca+JVfO3QG0 ODUoX/krdRiSeRi5MpcqZFJtWKYrV5z7sG/V =V33r -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--