Apollon soon in kde-extragear

[Scott Wheeler]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

First, thank you for your opinions here -- I was actually hoping that you 
would step into this issue.  (And I've snipped a lot of it that while I could 
possibly provide more clarity on some of the points, they've become pretty 
off topic.)

On Thursday 12 February 2004 21:17, Andreas Pour wrote:
> Scott Wheeler wrote:
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > The FastTrack network -- as I understand it the primary protocol used by
> > Apollon -- is overwhelmingly used for trading copyrighted material.
> 
> Please do not make factual statements based on RIAA propaganda.  
> Particularly when it may eventually be presented to you in a court of law.  
> (Perhaps you have done a study of traffic patterns, in which case I 
> apologize, but also request a copy :-) .)

Actually this is based on personal experience and the "analysis from roommates 
over several years".  :-)  Nothing particularly formal, but convincing enough 
for me.  I also haven't heard anyone suggest otherwise throughout this debate 
- -- except for you and I presume that's mostly to make a point.

> FTP and HTTP are all copying files generally speaking.
> 
> There is no reason FastTrack or other P2P networks cannot be used to 
> distribute news, political information, personally-recorded art or many 
> other things. 

No, there's no technical reason that they couldn't be, but well I'll be 
convinced the first time that I actually see someone fetching their news via 
Kazaa.  ;-)
 
> Of course it is easier for the monopolists to pursue the central distributor
> (the software author) then the people who actually violate the law.  The 
> fact that they destroy human rights in the process - the legitimate uses - 
> is of no concern to them.  However, that does not mean, nobody should be 
> concerned about that.

Sure -- I'm concerned -- I think it sucks.  I'd even like to see more cases 
get tested in court; I'm just not sure that I want to drag KDE into that 
process.

> Again, please do not state as facts things that have not been proven.  The
> lawsuits are ongoing and until it happens I prefer to believe that the 
> entire concept of P2P will not be invalidated - that is a clear and direct 
> violation of free speech and free association.

By "legal repercussions" I'm referring to lawsuits having been filed.  In the 
case of KDE e.V. having one filed is most likely about the same as losing.  
That's not nice, but I think a pragmatic point.  But more on that later.

> I think also one needs to recognize what community values are at stake.  I 
> think there is marginal value at stake in naming a program "KIllustrator" 
> but banning decentralized means of communication is another issue.
> 
> If the RIAA sues over P2P chat programs b/c they can be used also to 
> distribute copyrighted material, will KDE also remove support of those and 
> support only on AIM and MSN?

Honestly in the face of a costly legal battle I'm not sure what we would do.  
I wish I could easily say, "No, we'd fight for what's right", but admit that 
I'm somewhat dubious.

> Certainly this would be wise - a strong warning to users that they should 
> make sure whoever is providing the data has the right to distribute it.

Glad we agree here.  I consider this to be one of the more important points.  
I would assume that in such cases establishing "good faith" could be 
beneficial.

> What one can say is there is a risk KDE e.V. would be sued.
> 
> But again, I ask, where do we draw the line?  Did KDE stop distributing
> Konqueror and KHTML when Eolas was pursuing its patent lawsuit a/g MS?  Can
> anybody stop KDE from shipping any software or technology by threatening a
> frivolous lawsuit?

Well, this is what I consider to be the other "important" point and possibly I 
would draw the line at a different place than you.  I'm guessing you would 
agree that it's not quite apples and apples -- that p2p software has been a 
target of legal action -- and there I personally think that the additional 
amount to which this would make KDE a "target" is risky for KDE.  And again I 
personally feel that the risk is greater than the benefit.

However again, I've stated that I think that a compromise where we try to make 
clear good faith and a desire to operate and to facilitate operation within 
the law would be acceptable.

> I am not saying I have the right answer here, but also I think the issue is 
> far more complicated than you make out.  To me P2P is a rather fundamental 
> right, that people can converse w/ one another w/out having a 
> government-approved server in the middle.  That principle to me is worth 
> taking a risk for (and there is also of course a greater risk of other 
> technologies, such as CSS-1 IIRC and the Eolas patented stuff, which KDE 
> ships), others of course may disagree 

Again -- all where you draw the line.  I would draw it somewhere between the 
rather wide space of "having a government approved server between everything" 
and supporting the Kazaa network in KDE.  :-)

And I know that the Eolas stuff has been talked about pretty seriously in KDE; 
so it's not like that's being glazed over either.

- -Scott

- -- 
New Orleans food is as delicious as the less criminal forms of sin.
 --Mark Twain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFALBhLQu0ByfY5QTkRAr2wAJ9L6zXREB4urKr0hr4tKTF0pL7p8gCdHSvX
Zg5dzD1jiYZEbrn2s1s+d4E=
=MHlE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----