Am Mittwoch, 27. Januar 2010 13:40:08 schrieb Joerg Schilling: > Allan McRae <allan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. > > In the legal system I live and in case you live in the USA for you too, > _you_ would first need to prove that there is a legal problem with the > original software. > > Either do this or stay quiet. > > Jörg The point is that nobody of us can proof for sure if it's legal or not. So it's quite pointless to continue arguing here. Personally I have no objections against having a cdrtools package in our repository if someone wants to maintain it. Licenses are important, but one shouldn't be too picky about it. If I remember correctly the initial question was if it is legal to distribute a GPL licensed software build with CCDL licenses build system. Both licenses are 100% free and both parts have the same author. In this case we only have a very theoretical problem which might be interesting for lawyers but has no real impact. Even if the licenses are not compatible there wont be any real consequences. However, I am still with Allan here. All this situation was initially caused by Jörg himself and talking about a proof but not actually providing it does not help. PS: I wonder if this discussion will come to a conclusion before optical discs are obsolete. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
