Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote on 12/11/2023 at
16:10:21+0100:
> Dear Debian Fellows,
>
> Following the email sent by Ilu to debian-project (Message-ID:
> <4b93ed08-f148-4c7f-b172-f967f7de7...@gmx.net>), and as we have
> discussed during the MiniDebConf UY 2023 with other Debian Members, I
> would l
Let me pipe in here. I have been exposed quite a bit with EU legislation in
the process of our fight against software patents back in 2012. The EU
legislators are quite sensible when the underlying issues are clearly
explained to them, bu the legal language of the documents can be quite
dense and a
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 10:55, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>
> Let me pipe in here. I have been exposed quite a bit with EU legislation in
> the process of our fight against software patents back in 2012. The EU
> legislators are quite sensible when the underlying issues are clearly
> explained to th
Hi,
On 13.11.23 19:54, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
So a commercial company releasing open source
software that is *not* part of their commercial activity (for example a
router manufacturer releasing an in-house written Git UI) would be
"supplied outside the course of a commercial activity" and thu
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 12:20, Simon Richter wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 13.11.23 19:54, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>
> > So a commercial company releasing open source
> > software that is *not* part of their commercial activity (for example a
> > router manufacturer releasing an in-house written Git UI) wou
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 07:55, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
[snip]
> Even regardless of the specific legal wording in the legislation itself, the
> point 10
> of the preamble would be enough to to fix any "bug" in the legislation in
> post-processing via courts. As in - if any interpretation of the word
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 13:29, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer <
perezme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 07:55, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> [snip]
> > Even regardless of the specific legal wording in the legislation itself,
> the point 10
> > of the preamble would be enough to to fi
True, the employment status is irrelevant. However, in this example
Microsoft will actually have the liability of
providing the security assurances and support for systemd and related
systems, because they are providing
images of such systems as part of their commercial offering on the Azure
cloud
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 12:57, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>
> True, the employment status is irrelevant. However, in this example Microsoft
> will actually have the liability of
> providing the security assurances and support for systemd and related
> systems, because they are providing
> images of s
Correct. And I agree with that effect:
* a company paying salary of a developer that contributes to an open source
project outside of the commercial activity of the company does *not* expose
the company to extra requirements
* a company taking *any* software, including open source software, and
se
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 02:19:38PM +0100, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> Correct. And I agree with that effect:
same here.
> The *one* negative impact I can see of this legislation is impact on small
> integrators that were used to being able to go to a
> client company, install a bunch of Ubuntu Desk
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 12:31, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> > I am *not* objecting to Debian taking such a vote and expressing the
> stance intended. However, I expect that it will be seen by the EU
> legislators with mifled amusement, because in their context and
> understanding the legislative propo
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 09:54, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 13:29, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 07:55, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>> [snip]
>> > Even regardless of the specific legal wording in the legislation itself,
>> > the point
You are mixing up completely unrelated things. Commercial entities and
software coming from it have nothing to do with commercial activity.
The commercial activity is what *you* are doing with the software. It is
completely irrelevant where you got it from or if you wrote it.
If you are doing com
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 10:37, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 02:19:38PM +0100, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> > Correct. And I agree with that effect:
>
> same here.
>
> > The *one* negative impact I can see of this legislation is impact on small
> > integrators that were used to being
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 11:50, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>
> You are mixing up completely unrelated things. Commercial entities and
> software coming from it have nothing to do with commercial activity.
>
> The commercial activity is what *you* are doing with the software. It is
> completely irrelev
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 15:51, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer <
perezme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 11:50, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> > Whether accepting donations *in general* makes your activity in
> providing software a "commercial activity" in the context of
> > this direc
Aigars Mahinovs dijo [Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 02:46:06PM +0100]:
> By now the EU is actually quite used to dealing with volunteer
> projects and open source projects in general. So they would not be
> surprised in the slightest. And I do not believe it would tarnish
> the image of Debian.
>
> A lot o
Hi!
I have been part of the Mini Debconf 2023 in Uruguay and I second this.
On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 12:10:21PM -0300, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote:
> Dear Debian Fellows,
>
> Following the email sent by Ilu to debian-project (Message-ID:
> <4b93ed08-f148-4c7f-b172-f967f7de7...@gmx.net>), and as we
On November 13, 2023 12:29:20 PM UTC, "Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer"
wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 07:55, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>[snip]
>> Even regardless of the specific legal wording in the legislation itself, the
>> point 10
>> of the preamble would be enough to to fix any "bug"
At the moment - as the official proposals are worded now - everything
depends on the meaning of the word "commercial". Please note that the
proposals have some examples on this as I mentioned before - but each
proposal is worded differently.
The software is deemed commercial if
- the developer is
The discussion on this list hasn't even touched the subject of Art. 11
CRA which is the most worrysome.
Am 13.11.23 um 14:46 schrieb Aigars Mahinovs:
"See:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/10/eff-and-other-experts-join-pointing-out-pitfalls-proposed-eu-cyber-resilience-act
Note how the open sou
Thanks for the detailed explanation! It had quite a few details that I was
not aware about. Expressing the desired position of Debian and of the
community *is* useful, especially when there are multiple variants of the
legislation that need reconciliation. I was looking at the specific version
that
Marten from NLlabs made a comprehensive flowchart
(https://github.com/maertsen/cra-foss-diagram) that shows the state of
CRA as we presently (a bit of hope included) understand it. It includes
the 4th proposal. Check it out to see where your project possibly might
stand if we are able to hold this
Please Cc me in replies.
On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 12:10:21PM -0300, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote:
> Following the email sent by Ilu to debian-project (Message-ID:
> <4b93ed08-f148-4c7f-b172-f967f7de7...@gmx.net>), and as we have
> discussed during the MiniDebConf UY 2023 with other Debian Members, I
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes:
...
> Just to be clear: I also do agree with the main intention of the
> proposal, what I do not like is that the current draft wording might
> backfire on us.
I'd expect the multinationals, who have large legal teams, and are used
to interacting with t
26 matches
Mail list logo
