Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 4 May 1998 03:29:39 +0200
From:      Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>
To:        "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net>
Cc:        Matthew Hunt <mph@FreeBSD.ORG>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/www/ijb - Imported sources
Message-ID:  <19980504032939.07389@follo.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980503205621.20104E-100000@sasami.jurai.net>; from Matthew N. Dodd on Sun, May 03, 1998 at 08:59:31PM -0400
References:  <19980503230438.48318@follo.net> <Pine.BSF.3.96.980503205621.20104E-100000@sasami.jurai.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[taken to -chat]

On Sun, May 03, 1998 at 08:59:31PM -0400, Matthew N. Dodd wrote:
> On Sun, 3 May 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> > Should't this be under ATT (for "Automated Theft Tool")? ;-)
> > 
> > Refusing to download ads from the WWW is very bad practice.  Those ads are
> > paying for the service you're using.  I'm not even certain we should have
> > the above program as a port - I don't think we'd have a 'automated
> > crack-on-download' tool, for instance, and this is actually fairly similar.
> 
> I strongly disagree.

Arguments!  Come up with arguments!

> The only reason I have a problem with banners is that they break caching
> at times and are hosted on separate sites than the content and often stall
> the loading of the web page.
> 
> I'm on a 28.8 with 3 other people and about 8 to 16 systems.  The last
> thing I need is some lame ass animated GIF banner cloging my line.

This describe why you're inconvenienced.  Sure, I agree that banners are
inconvenient - I'm none too happy about having to download banners myself.

But let me do a slight re-phrasing of you:

"I'm on a thight budget, with 3 other people that use software too.  The
last thing I need is to have to pay for the commercial software we use."

Web pages with banners generally come with a license, too.  This license as
often as not explictly forbid modifying the HTML and pictures before
displaying the pages.  So, what you're doing is pirating web-pages.  I don't
think we should have cracker tools in the ports collection, and I
_especially_ don't think we should have power-tools in the ports collection
labelled as cracker tools.

Besides which I believe that filtering those banners is harmful in the long
run - the $.01 to $.08 you rip the web page owner off each time you view a
page without an ad _do_ add up.

Oh, and a new point I just thought of: FreeBSD is likely to be considered
associates-before-the-fact if we distribute something labelled so that it
can be considered a tool for crime.  I can look up the relevant statutes if
necessary - but I believe this can map onto the telecom laws they used
against Craig Neindorff (sp?).  Any relevant californians feeling like going
to jail over a package description? :-( (No, I did not really want this last
argument.)

Eivind.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980504032939.07389>