On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Joerg Schilling <joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > The license combination used by cdrtools was verified by several lawywers > including Sun Legal and Eben Moglen and no lawyer did find a problem.
[citation needed] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-news-team/2009-February/000413.html states that Eben Moglen claimed Ubuntu cannot ship cdrtools, which certainly seems like "a problem". https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2009-January/006688.html appears to be a reasonable statement of Ubuntu's position prior to that decision. > Finally, with help from Simon Phipps, Debian agreed on March 6th to go back > to the original > cdrtools. [citation needed] According to Debian's packaging database (http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cdrtools.html), cdrtools still hasn't been touched since 2006 in Debian. Neither cdrkit.org nor debian-legal in March (http://osdir.com/ml/debian-legal/2009-03/threads.html) nor debian-devel in March (http://osdir.com/ml/debian-devel/2009-03/threads.html) nor even Google for cdrtools Debian (http://www.google.com/search?q=cdrtools+Debian) have any mention of Debian agreeing to go back to the original cdrtools. Where and when was this discussed? > Note: the cdrtools fork "cdrkit" is violating both Copyright law and GPL and > cannot be legally distributed. [citation needed] According to whom is this the case? A quick search includes no claims but your own. - Rich _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
