[SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

chris_l · 2011-10-21 19:46:32

Recently, I found out that searching "abandon" on AUR, lots of results with "abandonia" on their description show up.

now, even the abandonia website state the following:

What is Abandonware? Is it legal?
Wikipedia: "Abandonware is computer software which is no longer being sold or supported by its copyright holder. Alternately, the term is also used for software which is still available, but on which further support and development has been deliberately discontinued."
Since the software is no longer sold or supported, the copyright holders are not directly harmed in any way. This is why abandonware sites are, for the most part, ignored by the law.
The distribution of copyrighted software however is, and will allways be, illegal!

Pretty much means "well... is illegal, but hey, we don't affect the author and the law ignore us!".

IF those games where shareware/trial versions OR freeware but-not-open-source games, it would be a different story. I know those are OK. (since the author allows -or even foments- distribution)
But they are abandoned FULL versions of non-freeware games.

so I want to know if is ok to keep those packages on the AUR. Maybe is actually ok, since there is not rule against that or something?

if that is the case, how about more recent software? it would be against the rules if someone uploads a full, cracked version of a coreldraw to some site, and a wine based PKGBUILD on the AUR to automatically download it and install it? is that ok?

I don't think is ok. I don't think it should be ok.

The guidelines (https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AU … Guidelines) don't say anything about abandonware or warez.
maybe it should be specified.

Last edited by chris_l (2011-10-29 00:44:26)

lolilolicon · 2011-10-21 20:13:48

Whatever ware it is, you don't upload a whole game to AUR... You just upload a PKGBUILD, who cares?

chris_l · 2011-10-21 20:38:43

If the PKGBUILD had a message like
"please, google for coolgame-cracked.zip file and download it on /tmp/yaourt-user/coolgame and press any key to continue..."
I would agree. Because on that case, the PKGBUILD doesn't include a link to a pirated ware.

But if it does auto-download and install a pirated version, then it does includes a link to a illegal file.

On the forums, putting a link to a illegal file is against the rules. (https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fo … e#Legality)
but the same rule doesn't apply to AUR?

....

really? so I can upload any PKGBUILDs that download and install warez, cracked programs? can I upload a PKGBUILD to autodownload some ms office, and configure it to work with wine? and on the camp "license" what should I put?

license=('warez') ?

Last edited by chris_l (2011-10-21 20:41:07)

jasonwryan · 2011-10-21 20:45:39

Arch doesn't permit warez: either on the boards or in AUR. If material is found that infringes copyright, it will be removed.

karol · 2011-10-21 20:58:39

It is OK to package freeware stuff or to provide installers for proprietary apps used e.g. via wine, like Death Rally.

chris_l · 2011-10-21 20:59:15

jasonwryan wrote:

Arch doesn't permit warez: either on the boards or in AUR. If material is found that infringes copyright, it will be removed.

I'm glad!

But I actually searched for such rule about warez on AUR. I didn't find it. I only found such rule for the forums.

So, please, any TU could edit the wiki to add such rule?
Yes, is a wiki, therefore I can edit it myself. But since is important, I think should be a TU the one to add it as a rule.

chris_l · 2011-10-22 03:38:20

karol wrote:

It is OK to package freeware stuff or to provide installers for proprietary apps used e.g. via wine, like Death Rally.

yeah, I know.
Again, is not about being propietary, is about being warez.

Like I said, propietary freeware, shareware, trials, etc are ok. (since the authors are allowing distribution)
And death rally is given for free on the remedy games site (and they are the authors) so that one is ok.

Awebb · 2011-10-22 08:00:32

We don't need a rule against warez, as warez are illegal in most states, especially in the one hosting the server. Is common sense that uncommon these days, that we need rules for the obvious?

chris_l · 2011-10-22 15:34:36

Awebb wrote:

We don't need a rule against warez, as warez are illegal in most states, especially in the one hosting the server. Is common sense that uncommon these days, that we need rules for the obvious?

yes, I think so. Is always better not to trust in the common sense of people. Sure, is pretty obvious to me that such software is not ok in the AUR, but if there are abandonware on it, means is not obvious to everyone.

read the replies, I got

you don't upload a whole game to AUR... You just upload a PKGBUILD, who cares?

So I think that comment proves the need of such rule.

Gusar · 2011-10-22 15:50:25

chris_l wrote:

you don't upload a whole game to AUR... You just upload a PKGBUILD, who cares?
So I think that comment proves the need of such rule.

I don't follow. lolilolicon is perfectly correct, you don't upload a game, you upload a recipe for installing the game. It's up to the user to actually obtain the game. In what way they obtain it is completely separate from the installation recipe.
Gentoo for example, has recipes (ebuilds) for non-redistributable games and even some non-redistributable apps. They have an ebuild feature, "fetch restriction". Which means the ebuild doesn't fetch the data itself, the user has to do it. Which means Gentoo is not involved in redistribution. Neither is Arch when it comes to PKGBUILDS in AUR.

Hmm, or are you saying that in case of those PKGBUILDs the data is fetched automatically? So it's not like fetch restricted ebuilds?

Last edited by Gusar (2011-10-22 15:54:50)

R00KIE · 2011-10-22 23:07:38

The games from the Humble Bundles come to mind, the user has to provide the archive, there is no link whatsoever for automatically fetching it.

The catch may be in what you call the package, and the fact that most probably the only way to get the needed files/archive is to resort to abandonware downloads (IANAL so better not say anything about legality).

chris_l · 2011-10-23 21:03:47

well, if someone resort to abandonware on their own, thats their problem.
Yes, a PKGBUILD is just a recipe to install some software... but is a recipe that includes a link, and in case of abandonware, that would be an illegal link.
And that is my only problem. If there is no link, I don't see any problem.

a wine PKGBUILD to install ms office, that say at certain point: "please mount your cd of office 2003, and then type the mount dir" instead of using a warez site to autodownload office, I think is ok. (a official trial version -if there is such thing for office- would be ok too)

Anyway, I think thats it. Unless someone has something else to say, I think is pretty clear right now that it is not ok.

thanks

ngoonee · 2011-10-24 01:20:55

chris_l wrote:

Anyway, I think thats it. Unless someone has something else to say, I think is pretty clear right now that it is not ok.

Out of curiosity, what does 'its not ok' imply? Is it:-
1. Such PKGBUILDs should not be uploaded.
2. Such PKGBUILDs should be deleted if reported.

A lot of abandonware is 'owned' by companies which no longer exist, or no longer cares about that particular software. From a legal standpoint, yes some of this abandonware is illegal, but the law always has room for interpretation/selective enforcement. To compare abandonware with placing links to download cracked Microsoft software is a spurious comparison unless you're looking at it from a moralist perspective.

megadriver · 2011-10-26 17:38:15

Let's see...

Alone in the Dark can be purchased here.
Battle Chess can be purchased here.
Space Quest can be purchased here.
The Incredible Machine and The Incredible Machine 2 can be purchased here.

If we define "abandonware" as "software no longer available for purchase", at least those five above are clearly not "abandonware"...

chungy · 2011-10-27 18:13:48

With that in mind, I searched around and found Doom II, which can be purchased here. Also note that while there is a "doom1-wad" in the AUR, it is legal as it is only the shareware version.

ewaller · 2011-10-27 18:54:18

People, it all comes down to one point. Copyright.

If you don't have explicit permission to copy and distribute, you may not copy and distribute. Period.
Some jurisdictions don't even have the notion of public domain.

karol · 2011-10-27 19:02:35

ewaller wrote:

People, it all comes down to one point. Copyright.
If you don't have explicit permission to copy and distribute, you may not copy and distribute. Period.
Some jurisdictions don't even have the notion of public domain.

It's also about responsibility of e.g. communities like ours wrt just providing the links.
If it's trivial to prove that it's not abandonware, we should remove those packages.

chris_l · 2011-10-27 19:06:20

Doom 2! o.o now thats piracy. That one is not ok for sure.

Putting aside the legal aspect, from a ethical point of view, (well, at least my own opinion)

well... ID software is a company that have always supported both linux and the free software movement (creating linux binary executables when their games are new, and then releasing the source code after some years)

Allowing piracy of their games is like a stab in the back. is just not nice.

[edit] that package was deleted, thank you.

Last edited by chris_l (2011-10-27 20:01:31)

synthead · 2011-10-28 00:57:33

This thread is going to go on for pages and pages, then the mods are going to lock it cause they're sick of people not "getting it" and don't want to deal with it anymore. But while I have the chance, I'll throw in my $0.02.

FOSS is built on two things: freedom and community. With freedom comes the ability to look through all the code and know exactly what your software is doing, and with community comes the common interest in sharing code, collaborating, etc. Piracy is just about the same thing, but with law sprinkled everywhere in-between. Freedom to copy and download whatever you'd like, and all the information you can handle, especially when it comes to where you can copy and download even more data. Combine the similarities with FOSS junkies that believe in a free world, and you'll find many that'll pirate software without caring because of their opposition about closed source software and copyrights (although many others just find no interest or passion in proprietary code).

So we have two matters at hand here, the piracy, and the information about the piracy. Stealing software is illegal, but if you knew a website online that sold bootleg copies, is your knowledge dangerous? Think of it like locksmiths: they make a living off helping people who are locked out of their cars, homes, etc., but if they had the same knowledge without holding the same professional license, would they be a criminal simply because they know about tumblers and their experience with picking tools? Or even a very common interest among us: IT security. If you understood that you shouldn't depend on MD5 algorithms due to MD5 collisions, are you a cracker? Where is the line drawn?

In my personal opinion (as a US citizen), your knowledge is a constitutional right. Technical abilities should not be frowned upon, but encouraged. The most important difference is the other side of that fence: using that knowledge. Knowing wireless security vs. cracking networks that aren't yours. Knowing how to count cards vs. actually doing it. Or how about one we are depended on every day: knowing the trade secrets at the company we work for vs. exploiting them. That line is drawn right down the middle of where these two concepts merge: trust.

Now let's get into the conversation about piracy and the AUR. Informational side: there is nothing wrong at all about taking propriety, copyrighted code and nicely packing up a pacman-installable file for you and others that legally support the company's software. You're moving files, writing scripts, and compressing them in a way that makes life easier for you. Epic isn't going to come after you for moving Unreal Tournament to a $pkgdir directory ... that doesn't make any sense.

So let's push the lines a little further. Say the UT CD you have was stepped on by a friend. At this point, you have one valid license without any installation media. This means that you are legally in the right to download the installation media and install it on one computer. In this case, you created a PKGBUILD that downloaded the game from the Internet. This is still legal. This is a rare exception that is usually a sorry excuse for pirating a game than recovering from a loss, but again, still legal.

But--allowing my opinion to come in here--it stops there. If there was a plethora of PKGBUILDs up on the AUR that linked to copyrighted software, a realistic person would understand that it's there to help pirates. If this was the case, there really wouldn't be much of a difference from the AUR and a torrent site. Hell, PKGBUILDs could even download from a torrent file as part of the build() function. Until a law is broken, it's not illegal, but any bit of information is just a pyramid wrapped of its own red tape you have to cut through before you get to the top, and then you've realized it was all to steal something.

Personally, I can't stand the idea that torrent sites are getting taken down left and right because they contain no data, just information, and free information should be rejoiced, not discouraged. But stealing software is nothing but illegal, and illegal activities should be stopped and accounted for. The grey area is huge and there's no way you can draw a line through it, unlike having that unique skill or knowing trade secrets from working for that company. And for the same reason this thread will eventually get closed by people who can't take it anymore, so will our false sense of freedom of information to pirate.

Last edited by synthead (2011-10-28 01:03:29)

ewaller · 2011-10-28 02:40:40

synthead wrote:

This thread is going to go on for pages and pages, then the mods are going to lock it cause they're sick of people not "getting it" and don't want to deal with it anymore. But while I have the chance,

Nope. We will close it because this is a technical forum that deals with technical issues surrounding Arch Linux. As we are a community with common interests, there are is some latitude for things that belong on blogs or GPL mailing lists. We also have the occasional humor thread around here. When this thread transcends that we will close it.

Another thing, all of us that represent Arch are individuals who are (1) volunteers, and (2) subject to the laws of our countries. We have an interest in keeping Arch away from lawsuits because (1) We like Arch Linux and want it to survive, and (2) If we don't, we could expose ourselves to unwanted legal entanglements.

IANAL
YMMV

Last edited by ewaller (2011-10-28 02:41:13)

trontonic · 2011-10-28 08:01:51

I think it's okay that PKGBUILDS that encourage piracy are deleted. Not because text files and hyperlinks should ever be considered illegal, but because such packages are offtopic for AUR as a whole.

Grinch · 2011-10-28 20:47:19

Well, this is very much a 'grey area' for me personally. I've never considered 'abandonware' as piracy (as a concept, on a title-by-title basis some games certainly doesn't belong there), on the other hand if you follow the law to the letter then yes it is.

Same goes for Mame/Mess-style emulation, they have a strict policy of not emulating games/systems until after 2-3 years after they've stopped being sold. I've been considering making an AUR package for MameHub which is a Mame/Mess (arcade/console emulator) version which allows you to play old arcade and console games ONLINE with people from all around the world.

I'm under no illusion that people on Mamehub (including me) playing games ranging from 'Secret of Mana' for the SNES to 'Marvel vs Capcom' on the arcade aren't breaking copyright laws (well, actually I do have a Secret of Mana cartridge somewhere in the attic but I sure don't own a Marvel vs Capcom arcade machine). Yet I don't feel like I'm a 'pirate' either.

chris_l · 2011-10-29 00:37:34

well, I think everything is solved now.

I got the following response on aur-mailing list:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 16303.html

and a errata here:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 16304.html

and our new rule is here:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … the_AUR.3F

Thank you very much to Ray Rashif for helping to clarify this situation.
And thanks everybody

moderator, if you want, this thread can be locked.

karol · 2011-10-29 01:17:57

Is this the end? What about combing the AUR to remove e.g. these games?

synthead · 2011-10-29 21:08:32

ttf-vista-fonts would also need to be removed then, since the EULA states that the fonts may only be used with the PowerPoint viewer (which is downloaded to get the fonts).

Arch Linux

#1 2011-10-21 19:46:32

[SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#2 2011-10-21 20:13:48

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#3 2011-10-21 20:38:43

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#4 2011-10-21 20:45:39

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#5 2011-10-21 20:58:39

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#6 2011-10-21 20:59:15

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#7 2011-10-22 03:38:20

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#8 2011-10-22 08:00:32

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#9 2011-10-22 15:34:36

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#10 2011-10-22 15:50:25

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#11 2011-10-22 23:07:38

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#12 2011-10-23 21:03:47

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#13 2011-10-24 01:20:55

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#14 2011-10-26 17:38:15

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#15 2011-10-27 18:13:48

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#16 2011-10-27 18:54:18

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#17 2011-10-27 19:02:35

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#18 2011-10-27 19:06:20

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#19 2011-10-28 00:57:33

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#20 2011-10-28 02:40:40

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#21 2011-10-28 08:01:51

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#22 2011-10-28 20:47:19

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#23 2011-10-29 00:37:34

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#24 2011-10-29 01:17:57

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

#25 2011-10-29 21:08:32

Re: [SOLVED] Is Ok to put "abandonware" on the AUR?

Board footer