Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 04:24:00PM +0100, Claus Färber wrote: > The _author_ of the GPL code is not able to violate his own > copyright. Therefore, he does not if he adds code not distributable > under the GPL. Unless the license of the non-GPL code prohibits this > combination, everything is ok fo

Re: The legality of cdrecord

John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote: > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to appear in > GPL projects, but it requires that code then to be distributed under > the GPL. Actually, the later is not completly true. The _author_ of the GPL code is not able to violate

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le samedi 10 novembre 2007 à 12:51 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > A GPL "work" that uses a CDDL library _may_ be a derived work from the CDDL > > library. The CDDL library is definitely not a derived work of it's uers. > > Of course. But the *co

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le samedi 10 novembre 2007 à 12:35 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > > > The GPL explicitely allows to use code under other licenses from GPL > > > > code. > > > > > > No, it does not. If you think it does, please point the line where it > > > "exp

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le vendredi 09 novembre 2007 à 11:14 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > Other code that is not derived from the GPL code is not part of "the work": > > > > - You do not need to put "non-derived" code under the GPL. > > You are basing all of your r

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 11:15 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > "John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to appear in > > > GPL projects, but it requires that code then to be distri

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le samedi 10 novembre 2007 à 12:51 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > A GPL "work" that uses a CDDL library _may_ be a derived work from the CDDL > library. The CDDL library is definitely not a derived work of it's uers. Of course. But the *combined work* that is constituted by the CDDL library a

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le vendredi 09 novembre 2007 à 11:59 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > Please first rething the rest of your text as you did base your claims > > in a way that misses the fact that the GPL makes a clear difference between > > "the work" and "the who

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le mardi 06 novembre 2007 à 22:10 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > Don't belive a site that publishes an incorrect FAQ for their own license. > > Don't believe people who make inappropriate generalisations. > > Don't believe people who do not discu

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le samedi 10 novembre 2007 à 12:35 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > > > The GPL explicitely allows to use code under other licenses from GPL code. > > > > No, it does not. If you think it does, please point the line where it > > "explicitly" allows it. > > Well, _I_ did already explain why this

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Shriramana Sharma writes: > Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote: Both versions of the GPL require you to provide all the source necessary to build the software, including supporting libraries, compilation scripts, and so on. >>> Thank you for proving that I am 100% correct! >>> >>> The GP

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote: Both versions of the GPL require you to provide all the source necessary to build the software, including supporting libraries, compilation scripts, and so on. Thank you for proving that I am 100% correct! The GPL does require you to provide everything that is nee

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le vendredi 09 novembre 2007 à 21:28 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > there is a problem in wodim. > > The GPL and the Urheberrecht both forbid to publish modified versions that > harm the reputation of the Author. There is nothing like that in the GPL. It only forbids misrepresentation of

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 11:46 -0500, Steve Langasek a écrit : > If you want my services as an English teacher, you'll > have to ask me for a quote; otherwise, finding the errors in your logic is > your problem, not mine. Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 17:55 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > Is t

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le vendredi 09 novembre 2007 à 11:14 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > Other code that is not derived from the GPL code is not part of "the work": > > - You do not need to put "non-derived" code under the GPL. You are basing all of your reasoning on the assumption that a program that uses a

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 11:15 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > "John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to appear in > > GPL projects, but it requires that code then to be distributed under > > the GPL. But to do so may infringe th

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le vendredi 09 novembre 2007 à 11:59 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > Please first rething the rest of your text as you did base your claims > in a way that misses the fact that the GPL makes a clear difference between > "the work" and "the whole source". GPL licensing only applies to "the work".

RE: The legality of cdrecord

Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 11:07 -0800, Yuhong Bao a écrit : > That is exactly why the code, not just the build scripts, are CDDL in > current versions of cdrtools. Now the remaining problem is about the > GPLed library that the CDDL mkisofs links to. Removing HFS support > would solve this proble

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Le mardi 06 novembre 2007 à 22:10 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit : > Don't belive a site that publishes an incorrect FAQ for their own license. > Don't believe people who make inappropriate generalisations. > Don't believe people who do not discuss specific license problems. And above all, don

Re: The legality of cdrecord

The GPL and the Urheberrecht both forbid to publish modified versions that harm the reputation of the Author. The Debian fork is full of extreme bugs and many people are thus completely unable to use the fork at all. You should be aware of the possibility that I (as the Author) could disallow pu

Re: The legality of cdrecord

>I do not know if you are right or not but it is not what matter. Debian >and other distributor may distribute a forked version for whatever >reason even for a bad one. I do not believe you will succeed to make I get the impression that you are not aware of the real problem. There is no licens

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:27:55 +1100, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >For those following along with this thread, Jörg has either chosen not >to respond to Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >http://mid.gmane.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, or is not >reading the list in which this discussion is taking p

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 02:05:05PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I believe the above interpretation is mistaken. See the recent > > . It > > says, regarding both GPL version 2 and versio

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Please first rething the rest of your text as you did base your claims in a way that misses the fact that the GPL makes a clear difference between "the work" and "the whole source". GPL licensing only applies to "the work". I do not know if you are right or not but it is not what matter. Debi

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Schilling) writes: > > > The GPL requires to publish "all" from "the work" to be published under the > > GPL but not more. > > > > - The build scripts in many cases are not part of "the work". > > This is true for all so

Re: The legality of cdrecord

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Schilling) writes: > The GPL requires to publish "all" from "the work" to be published under the > GPL but not more. > > - The build scripts in many cases are not part of "the work". > This is true for all software that e.g. uses autoconf. > This is true

Re: The legality of cdrecord

John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 08:44:56PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > On 11/8/07, John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > > > Of course, that still leaves the question of whether the CDDL code is > > > being used in such a way that the GPL woul

Re: The legality of cdrecord

John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 01:21:25PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > On 11/8/07, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to > > > > appear

Re: [Bulk] Re: The legality of cdrecord

STYLIANOU Konstantinos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > People, > > Excuse me for braking into this conversation of yours, but I believe > this exchange of wit between you does not serve the interests of this > lists anymore. Representing only myself, I would kindly ask you not to > flood the list

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 08:44:56PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > On 11/8/07, John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > > Of course, that still leaves the question of whether the CDDL code is > > being used in such a way that the GPL would require it to be licensed > > under the GPL. I'm

Re: The legality of cdrecord

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Schilling) writes: > "John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to > > appear in GPL projects, but it requires that code then to be > > distributed under the GPL. But to do so may infringe the licence > > for t

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 01:21:25PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > On 11/8/07, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to > > > appear in GPL projects, but it requires that code then t

RE: The legality of cdrecord

> The build scripts are considered to be part of the source code (GPL2 §3,> > GPL3 §1), and therefore must be under the GPL or a compatible licence;> the > CDDL is neither (http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses#CDDL). That is exactly > why the code, not just the build scripts, are CDDL in curre

RE: The legality of cdrecord

> Not anymore. Now almost all of the program is CDDL, except 2 libraries, one > GPL, and one LGPL. mkisofs links to the GPL library, and that is the > remaining problem. And it can be solved by removing HFS support. Yuhong Bao _ R

Re: [Bulk] Re: The legality of cdrecord

People, Excuse me for braking into this conversation of yours, but I believe this exchange of wit between you does not serve the interests of this lists anymore. Representing only myself, I would kindly ask you not to flood the list any more, because it is getting annoying. I am sure you are

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 11:34:48AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > You have been aked to proove _your_ claima many time but you did not do. > > Let us safely asume that as long as you are not able to proove the converse > > that my claims (being aligne

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 11:34:48AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > You have been aked to proove _your_ claima many time but you did not do. > Let us safely asume that as long as you are not able to proove the converse > that my claims (being aligned with lawyer statements) are true. You can assume

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 12:27:56PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > category anyway. The question is whether those build scripts > > themselves can be distributed under the GPL (as required by the GPL), > > and the answer (as I understand it) is no, b

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 12:27:56PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > category anyway. The question is whether those build scripts > > themselves can be distributed under the GPL (as required by the GPL), > > and the answer (as I understand it) is no, b

Re: The legality of cdrecord

John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > category anyway. The question is whether those build scripts > themselves can be distributed under the GPL (as required by the GPL), > and the answer (as I understand it) is no, because that would breach > the terms of the CDDL. Please read the GPL: The

Re: The legality of cdrecord

"John Halton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 07/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > GPL forbids GPL code to > > > > appear inside non-GPL project, but it allows non-GPL code to appear in > > > > GPL > > > > projects. > > As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GP

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 03:57:18PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > On 11/7/07, John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > > I'd be interested to know which "lawyer statements" you are referring > > to (genuine question - feel free to mail me the details off-list if > > you've previously po

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Joerg Schilling writes ("Re: The legality of cdrecord"): > This is of course a lie: You should disregard everything Joerg Schilling writes about licences. He is a well-known kook on the subject, and we (Debian) have had considerable trouble with him before. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCR

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On 07/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > GPL forbids GPL code to > > > appear inside non-GPL project, but it allows non-GPL code to appear in GPL > > > projects. As has been said already, the GPL does allow non-GPL code to appear in GPL projects, but it requires that code th

Re: The legality of cdrecord

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:38:39PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > >I talked to someone on IRC and looks like the only license issue concerns > > >mkisofs. This links to both GPL and CDDL code and this is illegal. > > > This is of course a lie: > >

Re: The legality of cdrecord

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Schilling) writes: > The GPL explicitely allows to use code under other licenses from GPL > code. Please point out exactly where the GPLv2 explicitly permits this. On the contrary, in section 2b, the GPLv2 explicitly requires redistribution under the terms of the GPLv2.

Re: The legality of cdrecord

>The CDDL-licensed code is not included in the GPL program; the CDDL only >applies to the build scripts. Not anymore. Now almost all of the program is CDDL, except 2 libraries, one GPL, and one LGPL. mkisofs links to the GPL library, and that is the remaining problem. Yuhong Bao

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:38:39PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > >I talked to someone on IRC and looks like the only license issue concerns > >mkisofs. This links to both GPL and CDDL code and this is illegal. > This is of course a lie: > None of the programs in cdrtools has license problems

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:54:01PM +, John Halton wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:38:39PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > mkisofs is GPL but uses CDDL library code. This is intentionally > > allowed by the GPL as the GPL is a highly asymmetric license. The > > GPL forbids GPL code to appe

Re: The legality of cdrecord

John Halton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:38:39PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > mkisofs is GPL but uses CDDL library code. This is intentionally > > allowed by the GPL as the GPL is a highly asymmetric license. The > > GPL forbids GPL code to appear inside non-GPL pro

Re: The legality of cdrecord

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:38:39PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > mkisofs is GPL but uses CDDL library code. This is intentionally > allowed by the GPL as the GPL is a highly asymmetric license. The > GPL forbids GPL code to appear inside non-GPL project, but it allows > non-GPL code to appear in

Re: The legality of cdrecord

>I talked to someone on IRC and looks like the only license issue concerns >mkisofs. This links to both GPL and CDDL code and this is illegal. This is of course a lie: None of the programs in cdrtools has license problems. cdrecord and other programs are 100% CDDL. mkisofs is GPL but us