Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Alec Warner
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Wulf C. Krueger wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 16.07.2014 18:06, Rich Freeman wrote: > >> IANAL, but there is no such concept as "abandonware" in copyright > >> law. > [...] > > This is legally a very risky thing to do. If you're

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/07/14 03:54 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Denis Dupeyron > wrote: >> >> Let me try and be clearer. The packages I'm concerned with have >> had their distfiles backed up. We're not yet in that situation >> but the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > Let me try and be clearer. The packages I'm concerned with have had > their distfiles backed up. We're not yet in that situation but the day > the publisher stops distributing these distfiles, I'll be ready to > send the right email to the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Denis Dupeyron
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > So, RESTRICT="mirror" would turn into > RESTRICT="officially-dont-mirror-but-actually-do-just-in-case-distfiles-are-dropped-upstream-but-after-we-still-cant-officially-mirror-them-due-to-license-and-copyright-infringement-anyway" > ? > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/07/14 03:19 PM, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Alexander Berntsen > wrote: >> Ulrich is right. Abandonware just means orphaned works -- i.e. >> the copyright holder hasn't sued anyone yet. Gentoo should not >> have

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/07/14 21:19, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > I agree with you and Ulrich. That was a very poor choice of word > from my part and not what I wanted to say. I didn't mean we should > distribute distfiles without consent, but back them up to a hidden >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Denis Dupeyron
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > Ulrich is right. Abandonware just means orphaned works -- i.e. the > copyright holder hasn't sued anyone yet. Gentoo should not have > anything to do with this. I agree with you and Ulrich. That was a very poor choice of word from my p

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Ulrich is right. Abandonware just means orphaned works -- i.e. the copyright holder hasn't sued anyone yet. Gentoo should not have anything to do with this. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNA

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Wulf C. Krueger
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 16.07.2014 18:06, Rich Freeman wrote: >> IANAL, but there is no such concept as "abandonware" in copyright >> law. [...] > This is legally a very risky thing to do. If you're going to do > it you want to take advantage of countries with friendly la

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > IANAL, but there is no such concept as "abandonware" in copyright law. > Copyright can expire, at which point the work enters into the public > domain. However, the time for that is generally too long to play any > practical role for softwa

[gentoo-dev] Re: last rites: games-fps/postal2mp-demo

2014-07-16 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > I have once asked Robin to archive the distfiles for a commercial > package which has RESTRICT=mirror. My reasoning at the time was that > if upstream disappears there's a good chance, depending on why that > happens, we can qualify the software a