[fab] [Fwd: What is the mkisofs license?]

[Tom 'spot' Callaway]

On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 18:26 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 18:22 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 00:10 +0530, Rahul wrote:
> > > Another license mess. Is CDDL by itself acceptable to Fedora at all?
> > 
> > Interestingly, I found in Google a story Rahul himself submitted to
> > OSnews back in 2004 regarding CDDL. :-)  In any case CDDL is OSI
> > approved, but that doesn't address the real question, I guess, which is
> > whether mkisofs is violating the terms of either the CDDL or the GPL by
> > combining code licensed under one or the other in a larger work.  
> > 
> > I have no idea whether the mkisofs authors have modified any of the
> > CDDL-licensed code.  If someone can analyze these issues -- at least
> > from the code perspective -- and present this as a fully-formed
> > question, maybe we can get a good legal opinion.  Until someone does a
> > little research and present details, I doubt that would happen.
> 
> LWN has a good article on this issue for those that are subscribers.
> 
> http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/

Eww. I vote we get all the schilling code OUT of Fedora as soon as
possible. With friends like him, we don't need enemies. He's merging GPL
and CDDL code, and that's just not permitted.

I say that we (Red Hat/Fedora) throw all our weight around:
http://www.arklinux.org/projects/dvdrtools

Fix it up to basic functionality levels and ship it. Nuke the Schilling
trash from orbit.

Then again, I've yet to see or hear any result from my previous license
analysis, so I can only assume that Fedora doesn't care to clean up its
existing egregious violations.

~spot
-- 
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Technical Team Lead || GPG ID: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!