[CentOS] RHEL on The Pirate Bay, Mininova, etc

[Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams]

On Sun, 2008-03-23 at 02:17 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >  > They are not imposing any restrictions on the software ... you have
> >  > signed an agreement that as long as you are entitled to get updates from
> >  > RHN that you will not do those things (it is an if/then statement).
> >
> >  But those things involve restrictions on the software.
> 
> I think the problem is that what is thought in these arguments to be a
> restriction on the software is not considered a legal restriction on
> the software.

I think you guys are going about it the wrong way. You're so focused on
the *contents* of the packages that you're missing the packages
*themselves*. Could the signing of the packages be considered a "work",
and therefore distribution of said signed packages be a violation of
copyright law?

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet at gmail.com>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080323/8c22bd11/attachment.sig>