Freeness (Re: Idea for expanded support of some non-free software)

[Jerry Haltom]

On Wed, 2004-12-15 at 21:41 -0500, thully at umich.edu wrote:
> How, then, is Ubuntu legally providing "dummy packages" for Flash in multiverse?

Oh look. So I guess you have nothing to complain about, right? What more
do you want? :)

> What about MP3 support (in universe)?
> Quoting Jerry Haltom <wasabi at larvalstage.net>:
> 
> > Let me reiterate the same stuff 10 others have already done, again:
> >
> > > In the case of drivers, Ubuntu takes care of this by distributing some
> > non-free
> > > wi-fi and video drivers.  However, there are other categories of software
> > that
> > > have a similar situation that it seems like Ubuntu should support - namely
> > Java
> > > and Flash.  These are utilized on many websites, and while the web is
> > usable
> > > without them (just as video cards can be used without the proprietary
> > drivers)
> > > users do lose the ability to use certain websites and online games (just as
> > > users lose 3D capability by not using the proprietary video drivers).
> >
> > NVidia and ATI specifically allow distribution as part of their license
> > agreements. This is an instance where Ubuntu has broken it's "free only"
> > stance to suit the users: because they can, and because a distribution
> > that doesn't boot on any video card is pretty useless.
> >
> > > I realize that Java and Flash may have more restrictive of license terms
> > than
> > > the ATI and NVidia drivers - however, software like this can be distributed
> > by
> > > using a "dummy package" that downloads the software from the official
> > website
> > > and then configures it to work in Ubuntu.  While these are currently
> > available
> >
> > This is an assumption. How do you know this software can be created?
> > Have you read the agreements?
> >
> > Ubuntu and Debian provide a "dummy" package for Java, called
> > java-package. You acquire the Sun provided .bin file from Sun, after
> > agreeing to their use terms, and then run this package on it. Boom, you
> > have a .deb to install. The package does not download the file from Sun
> > automatically, as doing so we would have to present you Sun's license
> > agreement. It is not Ubuntu's job to present you Sun's license
> > agreement. Sun may change it. It is probably even illegal to copy their
> > license under copyright law.
> >
> > > in multiverse, they are unsupported and breakage-prone (currently in Hoary,
> > I
> > > get no sound in Flash at all - rendering some Flash-based sites useless).
> > > While some may dispute whether Flash and Java are really necessities, I
> > don't
> >
> > Same situation with Macromedia. Have you read Macromedia's license
> > agreement? It even prohibits distribution within a corporate environment
> > unless you fax in and sign an additional document: FOR WINDOWS!
> >
> > Perhaps a "flash-package" in the spirit of Java package IS in order. If
> > so, I suggest you please create such a package such as somebody did for
> > java-package in Debian. The Ubuntu developers have their hands full with
> > a ton of other things which are more than likely much more important
> > than this. Be sure to read the license to know if any modification of
> > the binary as distributed by Macromedia is allowed! If it is not
> > allowed, Ubuntu would be placing their users in a position to
> > unknowingly violate their agreement with Macromedia.
> >
> > > think they are any less necessary than ATI and NVidia's 3D graphic drivers
> > - if
> > > anything, they are more necessary.  Though money must be spent on graphics
> > > cards, people also pay for an Internet connection, and they expect to be
> > able
> > > to utilize
> > >
> > > IMHO, since this seems very similar to the case of ATI/NVidia, Ubuntu
> > wouldn't
> > > break their principles any more by including a supported method to
> > configure
> > > and use Flash and Sun's Java implementation (but not necessarily
> > distributing
> > > them) than they do when they include ATI/NVidia drivers.    However, I seem
> > to
> > > be in the minority on this list, and I realize that.  Can someone clarify
> > why
> > > the case of Flash/Java is different than the case of ATI/NVidia for me?
> >
> > Just did. In fact I have a few times. A few other people have done so as
> > well. Please read the previous messages from numerous parties.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I realize this thread has gotten large and longwinded, but this is an
> > important
> > > issue - and it should be discussed.  If there is a better forum for this
> > > discussion, please tell me and I will move this thread.
> >
> > No kidding. This thread should die.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Jerry Haltom <wasabi at larvalstage.net>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
-- 
Jerry Haltom <wasabi at larvalstage.net>