Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:18:07AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > As you don't know what grants and what duties you have when dealing with free > software, please try to inform yourself. You may get into trouble if you > change > things that are forbidden by law. > > Let me quote the license person from the board of directors from the > OpenSource > initiave: > > No OpenSource license gives you all grants you need to change anything > in the source. If the authors or Copyright holders of a software like, > they may always sue you. If you like to avoid being sued, play nicely > with the Copyright holders. Uh, citation needed. "Giving you all grants you need to change anything in the source" is practically the definition of an open-source licence, with the exception of removing the original copyright and licence notices. What changes have been made that are supposedly illegal? (Note that introducing new bugs is, sadly, not illegal anywhere that I know of. If it were, Microsoft would've been out of business years ago, along with probably everybody else. ;) ) -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: b...@subvert.org.uk web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:40:45AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Benjamin M. A'Lee" wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:18:07AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > As you don't know what grants and what duties you have when dealing with > > > free > > > software, please try to inform yourself. You may get into trouble if you > > > change > > > things that are forbidden by law. > > > > > > Let me quote the license person from the board of directors from the > > > OpenSource > > > initiave: > > > > > > No OpenSource license gives you all grants you need to change anything > > > in the source. If the authors or Copyright holders of a software like, > > > they may always sue you. If you like to avoid being sued, play nicely > > > with the Copyright holders. > > > > Uh, citation needed. "Giving you all grants you need to change anything > > in the source" is practically the definition of an open-source licence, > > with the exception of removing the original copyright and licence > > notices. > > I recommend you to read the Copyright law: > > http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/urhg/index.html > > There are rights that _cannot_ be given away. Which of these rights do you consider is being infringed? -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: b...@subvert.org.uk web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 05:08:33PM -0800, Bill Unruh wrote: > On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, James Vega wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:41:54PM -0800, Bill Unruh wrote: >>> Thus, is it correct that the issue centers around mkisofs, a program which >>> is >>> under the GPL2 license and is linked with libscg, a CDDL licensed library? >>> Is >>> this where the dispute lies? >>> >>> If so, exactly what is the nature of the legal (as opposed to personal) >>> disagreement? Schilling has made clear that he does not believe there to >>> be any legal >>> impediment to the distribution of the software. Debian has made clear that >>> they believe that there is such an impediment. What, in as few words as >>> possible, is the impediment? >> >> Read the CDDL section under the FSF's list of GPL incompatible licenses. > > I have. It says nothing except give the opinion that the two are incompatible > ( as are GPL2 and GPL3). In particular it does not address the issue of > exactly why, in the case of cdrtools, the linking of mkisofs and libscg makes > the result undistributable. > Ie, it is not very helpful in helping to resolve this dispute. > >> >> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses >> As was explained elsewhere in this thread (though I don't blame people for missing it), the GPL mandates that additional restrictions may not be applied to the code, and the CDDL contains restrictions (related to patents) that the GPL does not. It's therefore not possible to distribute something covered by both the GPL and the CDDL without violating copyright law (unless one is the copyright holder). Jörg Schilling, as I understand it, does not believe that the above situation actually occurs, and that the CDDL-licenced and GPL-licenced parts are entirely separate. Debian disagrees. -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: b...@subvert.org.uk web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
