Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)

To: Giacomo Tesio <giacomo@tesio.it>
Cc: David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>, debian-legal@lists.debian.org, "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@ebb.org>
Subject: Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
From: Paul Jakma <paul@jakma.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 12:00:27 +0000 (GMT)
Message-id: <[🔎] alpine.LFD.2.21.1903201157230.4703@geneste>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAHL7psFxyPYoTOFp65QcAAc86z+87+-3w9sGpZL1kf3MtuWuUw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[🔎] 20190316211457.jzh6j7iofsvz3aff@qor.donarmstrong.com> <[🔎] 20190317130838.GP722453@eidolon.nox.tf> <[🔎] 20190320002805.tox3icncjtt3cxxe@ebb.org> <[🔎] 20190320075749.GB112463@eidolon.nox.tf> <[🔎] CAHL7psF1+GSmMGqobhW28Ybo-tZyaySJcBSyOdW8cvTJYULV5g@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] alpine.LFD.2.21.1903200958200.4703@geneste> <[🔎] CAHL7psFxyPYoTOFp65QcAAc86z+87+-3w9sGpZL1kf3MtuWuUw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Giacomo Tesio wrote:

Here I suggest you all to find a friendly solution anyway for the samereason.

I tried for years to find friendly solutions. Many of the things othershave suggested in this thread I already suggested/explored years andyears ago with the people who are now FRR.


If you or anyone else wants to help find a solution, you have my email.

Also, if 3rd parties were to do this, outside of a wider agreement with
copyright holders that would resolve all this, it would likely just
aggravate the situation further.


Sorry, but I don't think so.


You can seek your advice on that, and I'll take my own.

I would not consider that a solution, and not helpful or friendly.

regards,
--
Paul Jakma | paul@jakma.org | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A
Fortune:
The truth about a man lies first and foremost in what he hides.
		-- Andre Malraux

Reply to:

References:
- Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence
  - From: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>
- Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence
  - From: David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>
- no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
  - From: "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@ebb.org>
- Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
  - From: David Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>
- Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
  - From: Giacomo Tesio <giacomo@tesio.it>
- Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
  - From: Paul Jakma <paul@jakma.org>
- Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
  - From: Giacomo Tesio <giacomo@tesio.it>

Prev by Date: Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
Next by Date: Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
Previous by thread: Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
Next by thread: Re: [Fedora-legal-list] The license of OpenMotif (Open Group Public License)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread