[arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit

[Johann Peter Dirichlet]

2010/1/27 Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org>:
> 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.
>  This has been repeatedly asked of you
>
> You claim that you are allowed to distribute a tarball containing GPL code
> and that the needed build scripts are not required to be GPL because the
> build scripts are a separate project. You claim to have legal advise that
> your interpretation of the GPL allowing this is valid, but refuse to supply
> any evidence of that advise so that we can assess the outcome of the legal
> review ourselves.
>
>
>> Plese do not point me to the FSF Web site, it was not made
>> by a lawyer, it is not secific to cdrtools and I even have a private mail
>> from
>> Eben Moglen that is is made with general incorrect claims regarding the
>> GPL on
>> it.
>
> Great.  More evidence from your side that you cannot produce for anyone else
> to see. Can you actually produce anything backing your claims?
>
>
>> As long as you ignore legal principles, a discussion with you will lead us
>> to
>> nowhere.
>
> As long as you ignore the request to supply evidence that your claim is
> correct, a discussion with you will lead us nowhere.
>
>
> As the situation currently stands, there are claims that distributing GPL
> code with non-GPL build scripts is a violation of the GPL. This may or may
> not be correct (again, supply us some evidence that it is not), and because
> the GPL requires us to distribute the code, we would be in a legally dubious
> situation.
>
> I'd be more than happy for Arch to distribute cdrtools if the issue of
> whether the required distributing the source is legal is resolved. The
> technical merits certainly appear to warrant this.  That resolution requires
> some actual evidence be supplied...

Well, there are some lawyer we can just consult to put a thombstone on
this discussion? It will going to nowhere if we can't do this single
"clearing" of legal issues. In fact, this is the only hurdle to put
cdrtools in [community] repo (well, someone needs to adopt it, too).

>
> Allan
>