Sid Boyce
http://www.mail-archive.com/fedora-legal-list@redhat.com/msg00506.html
The details in msg00506 sums it up nicely. The CDDL ruled out using code under that license being used in Linux - by intention - it's code owned by Sun.
If you like to spread FUD, this is your decision. It is not related to reality - sorry. The person you are quoting here is no laywer and even otherwise completely uninformed about legal principles in general and the specific case in special. I tend to believe that he does not spread FUD by _intention_, but he unfortunately spreads FUD. It is bad to see that you confuse legal and technical points that do not belong to each other. You do the same thing as the non-cooperative package maintainer that initiated the disput did. This is something that will not help us to advance from the attacks that have been initated by an OSS hostile person (Eduard Bloch). What is Suse interested in? - Does suse like to distribute unmaintained software that is full of bugs? - Or does suse care about it's users and thus is interested in the well maintained and legal original software? 2~A -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org