Re: [arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit
Allan McRae wrote:
Not anything recent: http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/ . Debian thinks about these things a lot more than we do so I usually would defer to them. But given they essentially created the cdrkit fork, I'm not sure they are ever going to reassess the situation.
The article you mention contains a lot of dissinformation and I am not conviced that Debian did even discuss their actions with a lawyer. I am happy to answer questions based on informations I have from various lawyers from Germany and the USA, but please let us ignore the claims from LWN and Debian. They are not helpful. The Sun legal department did check cdrtools in Autumn 2008 and the legal review did take three months. The result from this check is that there is absolutely no legal problem with the original cdrtools software. Note that Sun is the biggest OSS distributor and thus is a potential target for people who like to sue companies for distributing illegal software. Sun thus has a big interest to avoid anything that might cause legal troubles. Sun for this reason decided to distribute the original cdrtools and not to distribute the fork from Debian. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
On 26/01/10 01:10, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
Not anything recent: http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/ . Debian thinks about these things a lot more than we do so I usually would defer to them. But given they essentially created the cdrkit fork, I'm not sure they are ever going to reassess the situation.
The article you mention contains a lot of dissinformation and I am not conviced that Debian did even discuss their actions with a lawyer.
I am happy to answer questions based on informations I have from various lawyers from Germany and the USA, but please let us ignore the claims from LWN and Debian. They are not helpful.
The Sun legal department did check cdrtools in Autumn 2008 and the legal review did take three months. The result from this check is that there is absolutely no legal problem with the original cdrtools software.
Do you have a link to a report made from that. The only information about this review I can find is various posts made by you. Reading the outcome of the review would really help clear things up. Thanks, Allan
Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
The Sun legal department did check cdrtools in Autumn 2008 and the legal review did take three months. The result from this check is that there is absolutely no legal problem with the original cdrtools software.
Do you have a link to a report made from that. The only information about this review I can find is various posts made by you. Reading the outcome of the review would really help clear things up.
Unfortunately, Sun legal does not publish their internal review restults. As a proof, you may check the Solaris distribution from Sun or you may ask Simon Phipps, the Sun OSS evangelist. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
participants (2)
-
Allan McRae
-
Joerg.Schilling＠fokus.fraunhofer.de