Apollon soon in kde-extragear

[Jeroen Wijnhout]

On Tuesday 10 February 2004 21:39, Petter E. Stokke wrote:
> > So there isn't any P2P code in KMLDonkey, but is very clear that
> > KMLDonkey can only be used in combination with mldonkey. So in that
> > respect, KMLDonkey is pretty much like Apollon. It would be different if
> > KMLDonkey could also connect to a back-end that supports a P2P network
> > with DRM (something that is 100% legal, without dispute), but that is
> > not the case.
>
> Nothing is 100% legal, without dispute, not even Linux (as I'm sure Darl
> McBride would be happy to tell you). If you want an example of a P2P
> protocol even the MPAA can't dispute the general legitimate usefulness of,
> how about BitTorrent? If even that doesn't sell you, how about HTTP? If
> you advocate putting DRM on _that_, I'm not sure I want to know about it.

Sure, my point was that KMLDonkey is as legal as Apollon as far as I can see.

> > Also, KMLDonkey has very convenient options to search for mp3's, movies
> > etc. Typically material that is downloaded illegally. It is clear what
> > the intended use for KMLDonkey is, the same as Apollon.
>
> Audio and video storage formats don't instantly imply illegality. I believe
> the MPAA already lost that debate in the 80's against Sony over the issue
> of VCRs. We're dealing with legality here - I'll have to refer you back to
> the Grokster/Morpheus case and dare you to explain how KMLDonkey could
> possibly be considered illegal if Grokster wasn't. I mean, we _all_ know

I don't think KMLDonkey/Appolon is illegal, as I said before I don't see a 
difference between the two. Probably courts will rule P2P to be legal (even 
the music industry is starting to pick up P2P as a way to sell their 
products).

> A wise man once said, "I'm not in favour of folding projects just because
> there is a vague perceived threat of a lawsuit."[1] If you'll excuse me

I agree, but even FUD can hurt us, right?

> > So I agree: Get KMLDonkey out of KEG or get Apollon in.
>
> That's the third time someone's uttered that sentence today, and I still
> don't know if you're saying "get KMLDonkey out" or "get Apollon in." Me,
> I'd prefer the latter, even if I _am_ biased.

Personally, I would prefer both apps to be in. Under the condition that they 
are aimed for legal use. If the authors would put examples of legal use on 
their website and documentation, it would make a good impression imho.

Perhaps they could stress the use of BitTorrent. In fact, why doesn't KDE 
distribute their tarballs via BitTorrent? It would make sense for KDE have a 
BitTorrent client then.

> In fact, maybe one ought to add a disclaimer dialog at KMLDonkey/Apollon
> startup ("does not condone illegal redistribution" etc.) just to be on the
> safe side. Would that sell you, I wonder? :)

I would prefer that, yes.

best,
Jeroen

-- 
Kile - KDE Integrated LaTeX Environment
http://kile.sourceforge.net