[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?

On Tue Mar 03 11:07, Joerg Schilling wrote:

> The rules of the GPL end at "work" limit and neither libc nor
> libschily or libscg are part of the "work" mkisofs. For this reason,
> there is no problem with the fact that mkisofs links against libschily
> and libscg.

The FSF certainly believes (and I think it is supported by at least US
copyright law) that the complete work of mkisofs linked against
libschily and libscg (i.e. the binary form, rather than the source) is a
single work which is a derivative work of all three individual (source)
works. Therefore, it must be distributed under terms which are
compatible with the licences of all three. 

You may disagree with this stance, however, it is a view which Debian
holds. Maybe that's just us being too cautious, but we are by nature
cautious and that isn't going to change. We do a lot of work and
distribution in the US.

You may also think that it _is_ possible to distribute under terms which
satisfy both the CDDL and GPL. There is certainly enough doubt about
this that again, we are being conservative in our interpretations.

Finally, to address your other point that the above view would make the
whole of Debian undistributable: this is where both the system libraries
clause comes in (which libscg doesn't meet) and also the fact that libc
is LGPL and the kernel is GPLv2+exception come in.

Anyway, Debian is not obliged to distribute your software. We have
deliberately conservative interpretations of copyright law and licences
which is unlikely to change. If you want us to distribute it you'll have
to do so under a licence we're happy with. This wouldn't be the first
time we've disagreed with people about the freeness of a licence...

Matthew Johnson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: