>That is where you are wrong:
>http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/09/msg00002.html
> "Unfortunately Sun then developed the CDDL[1] and J=F6rg Schilling
> released parts of recent versions of cdrtools under this license.
> The CDDL is incompatible with the GPL. The FSF itself says that this
> is the case as do people who helped draft the CDDL. One current and
??? Any reason to quote this FUD?
Your quote is complete nonsense and it is easy to prove that this text is
wromg.
If you insist in quoting FUD, we should stop here are you do not seem to be
interested in the truth.
>Listed as non-free by whom?
By the OpenSource Initiaive www.opensource.org.
It has been founded by Eric Raymond and Bruve Perence.
Pruce Perence did write the DFSG before he left Debian and OSI is using exactly
the same definitions (except that "debian" has been replaced by a neutral word).
Based on this text, people did believe that the GPL does try to violate § 9 of
the rules.
Later, the FSF made clear that the GPL needs to be interpreted in a way that
makes it conforming to §9 of the OSI/DFSG rules.
Interestingly: the FUD from some Debian deviants spread against cdrtools is
based on the wrong interpretation of the GPL...
>Well, IANAL, so I will defer to the opinions of the legal experts. They
>say there is a problem, and so I am inclined to believe them.
If you are not a lawyer and if you claim to listen to legal experts, why do
you listen to the Debian dilletants instead of listening to real legal experts?
Let us stop the "discussion" here, I do not have the impression that you are
intrested in a real discussion but only in spreading the FUD from the Debian
deviants.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
