Re: cdrecord: weird GPL interpretation
Raul Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 09:19:58AM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
>> While legally you're right, I think from a point of view of politeness
>> you're wrong. Maybe somebody who isn't Debian will fork cdrtools, but
>> in the meantime it should just be moved to non-free.
> Distributing a forked copy is just as polite (or impolite) as distributing
> a forkable copy.
I suppose that's true, but I don't see how it is relevant. The author
claims, madly, that his code isn't forkable in this regard and never
has been. It doesn't matter that his assertions about the GPL are
dribbling lunacy, and that I wouldn't trust him to interpret the
meaning of a bowl of oatmeal, much less EU Authors' Rights law.
In this case, what matters is that nobody be able to say "Debian took
this guy's software and did something he didn't want done with it."
Brian Sniffen email@example.com