Re: Can we pull KDE?
> David Welton writes:
> > Communicating with them seems like a first step.
> I wrote:
> > Seems to me that the first step is getting a legal opinion from a real
> > lawyer. Is there any possibility at all of doing so?
> Phil writes:
> > Why ?
> So that we will have a solid basis for a decision and an unquestionable
> response to the inevitable flames and accusations. We presently have at
> least three conflicting 'legal' opinions from at least three different
> non-lawyers. Don't you think it would be a good idea to resolve this with
> an opinion from someone who actually knows the law?
That's why I was saying that legal opinion is irrelevant.
You're going to need a lawyer who is a specialist in software and IP law to
get a useful opinion on this, and even then it will probably only be relevant
to one jurisdiction.
To approach this question from a different angle:
Does anyone here applaud what KDE have done w.r.t. licensing ?
I would assume that anyone that has actually examined the GPL would find
their use of it somewhere between misguided and reprehensible.
There are plenty of other licenses, which would serve their purpose, but they
don't think licenses are important (they are pretty blase' about the licensing
of other people's code too, which really is reprehensible)
I see it as our duty to educate them, and talking does not seem to be having
the desired effect, so the only other sanction we have is to stop carrying
Hopefully this will result in them fixing their ways, so everyone can live
happily ever after.
The alternative, is to have this argument simmer forever (there are some here,
myself included, who think this is important enough not to drop it).
Those who seem to think that licenses are not important, make me wonder why
they are involved with Debian in the first place.
The DFSG is what defines Debian after all, and it is all about licenses.
Licensing conditions are at the heart of what Debian is, and KDE's use of the
GPL is a cancerous tumour on that heart. I say ``Cut it out!''