Debian Project Leader Andreas Tille has addressed the ongoing debate over age-verification laws and their potential impact on free software operating systems. Long story short: he clarified that Debian has not adopted a position and is awaiting legal analysis.

In his latest “Bits from the DPL” message, Tille stated that the main question is whether operating systems and package distribution mechanisms might be required to provide age-related information to applications.

He noted that Debian and other projects are discussing the issue, and that Software in the Public Interest, a non-profit corporation founded to act as a fiscal sponsor for organizations that develop open-source software and hardware, has begun seeking legal guidance.

  • Software in the Public Interest is a US- based non-profit organization that legally represents and handles donations for Debian, Arch, LibreOffice, systemd and a lot of other projects. And if they’re in violation of US law, they can unfortunately be sued into oblivion. So they’re right to check with their legal team before making an informed decision.

  • quick_snail ( quick_snail@feddit.nl ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    6 months ago

    He also noted that, from a non-lawyer perspective, it remains uncertain how these regulations would apply to a non-commercial, volunteer-driven project like Debian, which does not sell software and distributes it in a decentralized manner.

    FUCKING THANK YOU.

  • I’m against these laws, strongly, but I think sending vitriol at systemd and distrust is not constructive.

    The battle is legal and pretending it isn’t and fighting our maintainers who realistically can’t afford to be sued over good, is not helping the cause.

    It’s humans at the end of the pipe. Thoughtful and vulnerable humans.

      • Stitch0815 ( Stitch0815@feddit.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        The dude literally added an optional birthday field next to an optional full name field and an optional adress field

        Then he got death threats

        If you think that is an appropriate response you are a litteral child, mentally speaking.

        • It’s not so simple as that, the dude provided a framework for privacy abusers to use to force us into their bullshit. If that framework did not exist they wouldn’t be able to do that so easily. There is absolutely zero reason for there to be a centralized location on an operating system that just hands out your demographic information to whoever asks for it and yes, that includes the fields that already existed. None of it should be in there. This is not something we should be compromising on. There are enough invasions into our privacy as it is.

          Doesn’t deserve death threats but he does deserve hate.

                • Senal ( Senal@programming.dev ) 
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I’ll assume you pulled that mental gymnastic routine out of the same place you store how you think the word literally is supposed to work.

                  At no point was “pull requests deserve death threats” even hinted at.

                  Semi-reasonable takes wrapped in logically dubious arguments is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

                  Doubling down with a retort that only requires you to read 5 lines to see it isn’t true is wandering in the fields of free and easy victory and choosing to drown yourself in the 2 inch puddle of defeat.

        • Death threats are stupid and indicate severe mental problems. This does not change the fact that the author explicitly mentioned that the aim was compliance with possible age verification laws. Just because he received death threats from some idiot man child does not mean he is right or what he did is inconsequential. It is a statement that they are willing to accept possible future identity verification laws without any legal fight and resistance.

    • Senal ( Senal@programming.dev ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d say it’s less a legal fight than it is a fight for control , using the law this time.

      Pretending that what people are upset about is the field rather than the pre-capitulation is not helping the cause.

      Most of the hate isn’t for the technical implementation of a field, though some FOSS people are upset at that as well.

      You can sidestep the legal fight by not serving the places where it is illegal.

      That’s doesn’t necessarily align with the goals of whatever project, but it is possible.

    • There is one small benefit to this speedbump on our road to freedom:

      Governor Gavin Newsom, Democrat of California? Has been acting like he wants to run for President in 2028. He signed this into law for his state.

      Make this an albatross on his neck. Sink him. Let him know that this crushed his dreams of ever being President. Publicly. Loudly. Don’t be satisfied until he quits twitter and retires from public life altogether, not just politics.

      And for anyone in New Jersey? Get loud at your state reps phonelines now, they’re trying to pass the same in your state.

  • This is what the DPL actually wrote on the subject:

    Recent discussions have started around new age verification legislation that may affect free software operating systems. In particular, the California Digital Age Assurance Act (AB 1043), expected to take effect in 2027, raises questions about whether operating systems and package distribution mechanisms could be required to provide age-related information to applications. In parallel, a recently adopted law in Brazil appears to introduce similar requirements and is already in force, with initial interpretations suggesting it could apply to components such as package management tools. These developments are currently under discussion within Debian and other projects, and SPI has initiated efforts to obtain legal guidance. At this stage, the situation remains unclear, and further analysis is ongoing.

    From a non-lawyer perspective, it is not yet clear how such regulations apply to a non-commercial, volunteer-driven project like Debian, which does not sell software and provides it in a highly decentralized way. It seems plausible that obligations, if any, may primarily affect redistributors or commercial entities building products on top of Debian. In such cases, Debian would as usual be open to contributions that help downstreams meet their requirements, while keeping such features optional and respecting the needs of users in other jurisdictions. However, this is an area where proper legal analysis is still required.

    Source: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2026/04/msg00001.html

  • someone ( someone@lemmy.today ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    The problem isn’t the specific nature of the rule: having an api call in the background that can broadcast a user’s age range (if it isn’t a clearly identifiable marker) makes sense.

    The problem is that if the government is able to tell open source developers “YOU MUST INSERT THIS CODE OR ELSE!!!” then what’s next?

    Will in 5 years they require Persona in order to install an Operating System to combat terrorism?

    Will in 7 years they require a closed source module created by the government to be running at all times and the kernel must check to make sure if the closed source module is running?

    Part of open source software is creativity, freedom, and freedom of speech. Some software is created because developers like creating things.

    I hope Debian fights back against this on first amendment grounds. Great code is not that different from a great work of art, there is unique creativity in something elegantly coded that functions well, and telling developers they can’t code how they want is the path toward totalitarianism.

    It’s one thing to force this into Microslop and Android and iOS because those are large profitable companies who don’t actually care as long as they make money. It’s another thing to force FOSS developers who develop for free because of the love of software and great code that they must change their code in a certain way.

    • ATS1312 ( ATS1312@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The problem is that if the government is able to tell open source developers “YOU MUST INSERT THIS CODE OR ELSE!!!” then what’s next?

      What’s next is that code gets a build flag that’s turned off in the makefile, and maintainers have to explicitly turn it on for that code to compile in. Distros maintain patches that add this sort of thing all the time, even if upstream refuses to do so.

      And Debian is saying that, as a non-profit, all volunteer org? This bullshit doesn’t apply to them. They are building a legal basis for the makefile solution I’m describing above, and its default-off state in their repositories.

      All of your catastrophising can be addressed this way. We need devs like you who can help make sure this solution is implemented exactly as described.

      Debian repos are great - we can even blacklist official repos and replace them with bare, sketchy IP addresses if we like, and share binaries through them.

      You cannot stop the signal. Quit thinking like a voter trapped in a Fascist hellscape, and start thinking like a hacker that the state cannot outmaneuver.

  • I think the position to adopt is very clear:

    1. You stand upright facing the nearest government building.
    2. You extend your right arm horizontally in front of you.
    3. You rest your left hand, palm down, on top of your right arm, next to your antecubital fossa (the opposite side of the elbow).
    4. You make a fist with your right hand.
    5. Without opening your fist, you extend your right hand’s middle finger straight up.
    6. You decisively bend your right arm at the elbow, standing your forearm, fist, and middle finger straight up.

    Thus you achieve the only reasonable position towards this nonsense.

  • kieron115 ( kieron115@startrek.website ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    Tille suggested that, if such obligations arise, they would likely affect redistributors or commercial entities building on Debian, rather than the Debian project itself.

    if my edgerouter 4 adds age verification i’m going to burn everything to the ground