cvs commit: ports/audio/lame Makefile

[Alexander Leidinger]

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:05:52 -0500 (EST)
Trevor Johnson <trevor at jpj.net> wrote:

> Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> 
> > AFAIK: Restricted implies "do not distribute the source". But
> > distributing the source is ok. Only distributing binary packages is
> > questionable. That's the reason we don't offer binaries at SF.
> 
> By giving someone the sources, we make it easier for someone to use LAME.
> IANAL but this might be "contributory infringement."  For instance, there
> are at least two FreeBSD distributors in the United States, which has
> software patents, and where the law says:
> 
>   (a) Except as otherwise provided in this title [35 USC 1 et seq.],
>       whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any
>       patented invention, within the United States or imports into the
>       United States any patented invention during the term of the patent
>       therefor, infringes the patent.
> 
>   (b) Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as
>       an infringer.
> 
> --<URL:http://www.bitlaw.com/source/35usc/271.html>

Wasn't there a "the source is just some kind of free speech" in the
DeCSS case? What ever, I'm not a lawyer and I'm happy about this. I
don't want to mess with the stupid american law system, so find someone
(e.g. kris, with or without the portmgr hat) who agrees with your view
regarding the use of RESTRICTED instead of NO_CDROM (feel free to read
this as "Commit approved by maintainer in case another committer shares
your view.").

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
           I will be available to get hired in April 2004.

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7