GNU bug report logs - #38360
Retroarch might violate FSDG

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
To: Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab <at> web.de>
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>, 38360 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#38360: Retroarch does violate FSDG
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 23:24:49 -0500

Hi Arne,

Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab <at> web.de> writes:

> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Guix,
>>
>> This is not about Schrödinger's proprietary-until-proven-innocent
>> binary.  The Updater includes at least two cores explicitly marked as
>> non-free in Debian:
>>
>>  libretro-genesisplusgx
>>  libretro-snes9x
>
> In non-free because they are non-commercial, not because they
> treacherous to users.

Your words "In non-free because they are non-commercial" are unclear.
I guess you meant to say "They are in non-free because they prohibit
commercial use".  Is that right?

> This is a distinction the FSF used to make until 2010 but dropped since then:
> https://web.archive.org/web/20100126044451/http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#semi-freeSoftware

What distinction do you think was dropped by the FSF since 2010?

If you're suggesting that the Free Software Definition was changed in
2010 to allow programs that prohibit commercial use, you are certainly
mistaken.

The current Free Software Definition states:

  “Free software” does not mean “noncommercial”.  A free program must
  be available for commercial use, commercial development, and
  commercial distribution.  Commercial development of free software is
  no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important.
  You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may
  have obtained copies at no charge.  But regardless of how you got
  your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the
  software, even to sell copies.

  <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>

Moreover, the GNU FSDG states:

  A free system distribution must not steer users towards obtaining any
  nonfree information for practical use, or encourage them to do so.

where "information for practical use" is defined as:

  “Information for practical use” includes software, documentation,
  fonts, and other data that has direct functional applications.  It
  does not include artistic works that have an aesthetic (rather than
  functional) purpose, or statements of opinion or judgment.

  <https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>

>> Disabling the Updater seems like an open & shut case to me.

Agreed.

    Thanks,
      Mark

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.