JBoss stalled (was Re: status of some packages ??)

[Alex Hudson]

On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 15:09 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> The argument that "everyone else is doing it, so it must be fine" is
> also completely false. As my mother eloquently put it to me at age 6,
> "If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?".

That's not the argument I'm putting forward.

The "French cannot waive copyright" argument brings you to the
conclusion you stated; "[The license] is not valid, we can't use it".

That same argument holds, as far as I can see, for every other
distributor.

So effectively we're arguing that everyone else, Red Hat included, is
either oblivious to the legal risk or they looked at it and came to the
wrong conclusion. All of them.

I'm not saying that's true one way or another, but it would seem to me
that at least getting a second opinion would be worthwhile, because
Fedora's legal resource appears to be making some pretty extraordinary
claims.

And if it is true, I would bet there are significantly more problems
that aopalliance, since there are very few [no] licenses which deal with
EUisms like moral rights, database rights, etc...

Cheers

Alex.



--
This message was scanned by Better Hosted and is believed to be clean.
http://www.betterhosted.com