**********
You should start to learn about the nettiquette and not
shorten the Cc: list! Otherwise people will believe that you have
something to hide....
**********
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > you did not reply to my last mail, so it is obvious that you have no
> > arguments to prove the claim that cdrtools has license problems or
> > may be undistributable by Debian.
>
> I have not responded because they do not raise any issues which are of
> any interest to me, nor do they adequately address the crux of the
> argument as presented in the two paragraphs in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. [1]
I did reply to you and tell you why your claims are wrong.
You are continuously completely missinterpreting the GPL:
You are mixing different parts of the GPL and incorrectly claim that
a restriction that applies to a specific part of the GPL also applies
to other parts of the GPL. This is obviously wrong! Only restrictrions
that are explicitly mentioned in a specific paragraph are applicable to
this specific paragraph...
> I do not have copious amounts of time to spend discussing
> oversimplificiations of the licenses with you; if you can distill your
> arguments into a short, well formulated message that precisely
> explains why the clauses I have identified do not conflict with
> appropriate verbatim inclusions of the clauses and why you interpret
> them that way, and citations of case law,[1] I will respond.
YOU did start this thread and you forced me to spend a lot of time with it.
YOU have been unable to prove any of you claims so far.
YOU need to either continue this thread and prove your claims or admit that
your claims are wrong.
If you do not prove your claims, we need to asume that you admit that your
claims are not true.
You seem to completely missunderstand this case: It is not me who need to
prove that there is no problem but YOU need to prove that there _is_ a problem.
> 2: This means court cases which illustrate the point that you're
> trying to prove, preferably in the US, not websites that claim German
> law actually applies to the US without case law indicating the precise
> depth thereof.
I told you more than once that German law applies to cdrtools.
US courts are obviouisly not relevent.
But again: this is irrelevent.
You started this thread and you have been unable to prove your claims.
I ask you to either prove your claims or to close the bugs #350739 & #350739
within one week.
Best regards
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
