Re: [GNU-linux-libre] MAME

[J.B. Nicholson]

Joshua Gay wrote:
> I've thought a lot about this issue. Here are my thoughts and concerns
> on the idea behind this project and on packaging and redistributing it.

First, thanks so much for your considerate view of things here. It's great 
to see someone at the FSF participate in the discussion and take an 
interest in emulators.

I agree that users will want to run emulators for a number of perfectly 
valid reasons, but I've been unable to find anything in the guidelines at 
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html which 
uses those reasons as a rationale for concluding it's okay to distribute 
one's fork of MAME.

After reading your thoughts I'm left with the impression that inducing 
users to obtain proprietary software is still an important thing to avoid; 
the FSF's guidelines for free distros and 
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-program.html also 
says this must be avoided. I also see that you're giving advice about 
distributing one's fork of MAME. Hence I have to ask: can an FSF-approved 
free software distribution distribute a renamed, trademark-removed variant 
of MAME and still qualify for being called an FSF-approved free software 
distribution?

Whatever the answer to that question, I hope that the guidelines for free 
software distros at 
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html will 
be updated to help us understand the answer and rationale so we have 
something to point to when this issue comes up again and possibly avoid the 
confusion that led to this thread.

Depending on how this comes out, another essay 
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-program.html should 
be considered for updating too because this essay also stresses the 
importance of not urging others to use nonfree software.

Thanks again for your input.