Wanted: Flash player for <browser_of_choice>....

[Eric Schuele]

Chris Hill wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Gary Kline wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 06:41:16PM -0500, Eric Schuele wrote:
>>> Joseph Vella wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday 11 April 2006 06:47, Eric Schuele wrote:
>>>>> [Hoping this isn't too OT for the list]
>>>>>
>>>>> So... now that www/linux-flashplugin* are gone,  I was hoping to get
>>>>> opinions on which alternative flashplayer(s) are reasonably good.  
>>>>> I use
>>>>> firefox and would prefer a plugin for it... but am generally 
>>>>> interested
>>>>> in the state of any flash player.  I know there are a handful in 
>>>>> ports,
>>>>> just wanted some opinions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could anyone please offer their opinion on
>>>>>  - which alternative they are using
>>>>>  - why
>>>>>  - comment(s) on installation ease (or lack thereof)
>>>>>  - is it a standalone or plugin
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I missed it.  Why is www/linux-flashplugin* gone?
>>>
>>> From /usr/ports/UPDATING:
>>>
>>> 20060408:
>>>   AFFECTS: users of www/linux-flashplugin*
>>>   AUTHOR: hrs at FreeBSD.org
>>>
>>>   These ports have been removed because the End User License Agreement
>>>   explicitly forbids to run the Flash Player on FreeBSD.
>>>   For more details, see
>>>     http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/license/desktop/
> 
>>     Good grief!  Is this even under linux-emulatio?  Oughtta read
>>     the URL.  WHat a pain!
> 
> Seriously. But there it is, in section 3.a.(D) of the given URL:
>   "You may not use the Software on ... any operating system that
>    is not an Authorized Operating System."
> 
> I wonder why Macromedia felt the need to pay their lawyers to add this 
> clause. I will email them and ask, if I can find a way to do so.
> 
> Serious question: If one already happened to have this package 
> installed, could he hold onto it by editing pkgtools.conf to contain
>     HOLD_PKGS = [
>       'linuxpluginwrapper*',
>     ]
> 
> ?

Legally?  I'm no lawyer... but the EULA seems rather explicit.  I'd say no.

Would that hold it?  Well yes, I believe so. (Or at least something very 
similar).  In fact you could go so far (not that I'm condoning it) as to 
tuck the distfiles away.

Either way... I hope somehow they see fit to loosen the language a bit 
in the future.

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> Chris Hill               chris at monochrome.org
> **                     [ Busy Expunging <|> ]
> 


-- 
Regards,
Eric