Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?
William Pitcock <nenolod@sacredspiral.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > The fork distributed by Debian may however be called dubious:
> > > >
> > > > - The fork is in conflict with the Copyright law and thus may not be
> > > > legally distributed.
> > >
> > > If your code was Free Software, then it is perfectly legal for Debian to
> > > do what it does.
> >
> > It seems that you first need to learn what Free Software means and what
> > constraints the License and the Copyright law enforce. A Free software license
> > allows you to do many things, it does definitely not allow you what Debian did.
>
> While I personally do not use wodim, simply because wodim does not
> inspire much confidence with me being based on cdrecord, I have a few
> observations:
>
> 1. If your code was licensed correctly, and there wasn't concerns about
> it's quality, then nobody inside Debian would have forked it.
This is an asumption that is only true in a "nice world". Unfortunately, there
are some "Debian maintainers" that rather attack software authors instead of
colaborating.
wodim has been created by Eduard Bloch because he is a person who is interested
in actively preventing collaboration.
The attacks run by him started in May 2004 and at that time he did already
create broken (buy him) versions of cdrecord and shipped them as Debian package.
> 2. I am not convinced that there is any legal issue with the fork of
> cdrecord as wodim; it is clearly identified that it is a fork, and
There definitely _is_ a major legal problem with the fork.
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Reply to: