"Christofer C. Bell" <christofer.c.bell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Please read this: > > > > http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf > > > > > > It gives valid legal theories for all claims and it explains why there is no > > problem. > > So far I've read the first 1/3 of the document and everything I've > read disagrees with your position. The other documents you've Or in other words, you have no arguments. If you have any valid arguments you are welcome. As long as you don't, I see no way to continue the discussion as it will not take us any further. It is a shame that laymen repeat claims about supposed license incompatibility without giving any evidence. It is a shame that people still quote unproven claims from the the initiator of agressions against the OSS project cdrtools. Is there any hope to have a fact based discussion in this mailing list? In other words: if you really believe that there is a license problem you should be able to name it and to prove it. BTW: Just giving vague signs without any evidence is usually called "FUD"... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (uni) joerg.schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
