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

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

Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:

> Bill Unruh <unruh@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> ...
>> >
>> > As a hint: "the work mkisofs" is the plain files that can be found in the
>> > sub-directory "mkisofs" in the cdrtools source tree. Other sub-directories in
>> > this source tree colletion contain _other_ independent works.
>> >
>> >
>> > You have to decide whether the GPL is a completely unusable license or whether
>> > there is no problem with mkisofs.....
>> I am afraid that we will not solve the problems of the shortcomings of GPL
>> here. The question is whether or not we can solve the problems of the
>> different reading of the GPL for the purposes of this one program, mkisofs.
> Well despite the claims from some people that try to prevent a solution, 
> there in fact is only a very minor disagreement. This disagreement is based on 
> the attempt from some people to interpret some meaning into the "system 
> exception" that is not in the GPL text.

The "system exception" can not be applied for Debian so whatever
differences there are about interpreting it arecompletly
irrelevant. The whole clause does not apply.

>> I understand that in the legal theory you have about the programs there is no
>> problem, while under the theory espoused by Debian and many other
>> distributions there is a problem. Lets not try to solve everything here, but
>> only the one thing-- mkisofs. As I have said, the users would thank you.
> Do you see a chance that people would re-read the GPL and try not to put 
> meaning into the GPL that is not in the text?

No. That is what Lawyers do. It is what practicing law means. :)

> Last night, I send a quote from Eben Moglen that confirms that the "system 
> exception" has no meaning besides giving the permission to omit things from 
> "the complete source".
> Jörg

And it still doesn't apply to Debian. So whatever permission to omit
things it gives you is void. It doesn't apply to Debian.


Reply to: