On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Joerg > > The FSF has no relevence in this case as the FSF does not hold > any Copyright on the related code. The text on the FSF web pages > was written by laymen and does not contain legal based explanations. Please take this as constructive criticism. This statement here is why no one is taking you seriously. You claim the FSF has no relevance despite the fact that you used *their* license. The FSF is full of lawyers in whose opinion *their* license says is not compatible with the CDDL and thus you are mistaken when you say it is. You also claim that cdrkit is "illegal". Your older cdrtools is licensed under the GPL, the derivative work, cdrkit, is likewise, in compliance with the GPL, also licensed under the GPL. Saying it's illegal is absurd on its face. This, Joerg, is why no one is taking you seriously in this discussion. Again, please accept this as constructive criticism and use this as a jumping off point to re-evaluate your arguments and frame them in a way that people can take seriously. Thank you. -- Chris _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
