Am Mittwoch, 27. Januar 2010 13:40:08 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 27/01/10 20:02, Joerg Schilling wrote:
There was nothing but a social attack from a hostile person. Please show me a report from a single lawyer that proves that there is a legal problem with the original software.
Please provide a report from a single laywer showing that there is not.
In the legal system I live and in case you live in the USA for you too, _you_ would first need to prove that there is a legal problem with the original software.
Either do this or stay quiet.
Jörg
The point is that nobody of us can proof for sure if it's legal or not. So it's quite pointless to continue arguing here. Personally I have no objections against having a cdrtools package in our repository if someone wants to maintain it. Licenses are important, but one shouldn't be too picky about it. If I remember correctly the initial question was if it is legal to distribute a GPL licensed software build with CCDL licenses build system. Both licenses are 100% free and both parts have the same author. In this case we only have a very theoretical problem which might be interesting for lawyers but has no real impact. Even if the licenses are not compatible there wont be any real consequences. However, I am still with Allan here. All this situation was initially caused by Jörg himself and talking about a proof but not actually providing it does not help. PS: I wonder if this discussion will come to a conclusion before optical discs are obsolete. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre