[Dev] Parabola stance on game assets

pribib pribib at bluehome.net
Fri Sep 28 04:26:17 GMT 2018

As an example further to discussion r.e. youtube-dl, the _*NSFW site*_ 
Motherless (https://motherless.com/tou (link provided only to provide a 
reference for the quote)) has terms of use which state the following:

      /3.3 License Grant /


/The Company hereby grants you a nonexclusive, nonsublicensable, 
nontransferable license to access the Website and its content for your 
personal and noncommercial use in accordance with this agreement. 
“Access” means visit the Website, use its services, and view or download 
its content. “Content” means any material, including the text, software, 
scripts, graphics, photos, sounds, music, videos, audiovisual 
combinations, interactive features, communications, profiles, streams, 
data, and other materials found on the Website. “Personal and 
noncommercial use” means a presentation of the content for which no fee 
or consideration is charged or received, which takes place in your 
private residence or, if outside your residence, is limited to a private 
viewing by you. Personal and noncommercial use excludes any public or 
private event presentation even if no fee is charged./

This states that the videos are in fact licensed for *noncommericial 
*and *personal *use and also includes additional restrictions. This 
seems in contrast with the definitions provided at 
http://freedomdefined.org/Definition yet this capability is in Parabola 
found at 
/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/youtube_dl/extractor/motherless.py when 
youtube-dl is installed. If OpenMW logic is applied here, this should be 
patched for removal.

To sum up so far we have:

  * inconsistent viewpoints from the few developers who which to speak
    on the subject leaving users to reference other things
  * a social contract inconsistently implemented in practice and reference
  * a package that was permitted within Parabola which distributed
    nonfree artwork directly
  * a package in the repository that enabled downloading of nonfree artwork
  * a package in the repository that has specifically been modified to
    remove the ability to make use of nonfree artwork
  * a package in the repository which could be considered reccomending
    nonfree artwork

I hope this clarifies the confusion on the subject. If it appears that I 
am solely referencing the extreme of the FSDG emulation and not 
providing access to non free artwork I would like it to be known that 
this is because if we look at the extreme then the maximum amount of 
considerations can be raised instead of limiting ourselves by only 
thinking of a smaller perspective.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20180928/07d32e89/attachment.htm>

More information about the Dev mailing list