I am not in any way officially speaking for fedora, Just my 2ct: 1. FSF is very explicit about GPL and CDDL: > This means a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the > CDDL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the > CDDL for this reason. So at this point it seems to be illegal to distribute mkisofs. I wonder if one could use a special exception (I asked FSF europe once on licensing an eclipse plugin but that was GPL'd source distributed with EPL components, not sure if that applies here.). 2. Jörg, could you please be more verbosive about why exactly fedora is currently violating UrhG? I cannot see how how you could revoke a once granted license because they use "your" filenames. Especially: Which marks do you claim are required because of §13 and since cdrkit is a derived work how do debian developers in _any_ way change _your_ work?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
