On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Adrian Schröter wrote: CC'ing to Build-Service. [.. stripped but still understandable I think ..]
It is no reason and Novell (in this your lawyers) also knows this, but I understand, that Novell will not fight in these cases, as the company editions don't need tools like this and the end users don't pay enough. Sad but true. Anyway I ask myself how we should get useful laws, when the ones who have to power to fight don't do it.
In general you are right, but see it also from the other side. Novell Legal can not fight against everything and cases like the SCO case do burn already lot's of power of the legal departement. Additionally, I see a problem here, since Novell can not prove to use mldonkey (or any eDonky client) to use for a valid reason in his business.
Maybe one thing: A possibility to circumvent these problems would be a Novell independent BuildService. It could handle all these problems, which Novell cannot handle. If e.g. a Germany based non-profit organization would provide an equal framework as the Novell buildservice most of the problems would vanish (there would still be illegal/legal problems, but much less than for a worldwide operating company). Anyway to really work well a financial as well as legal support would be required (at least in the startup phase). Could you/we/your superiors start to really think about starting such an organization? Generally this would mean giving the Novell community a real voice. I really like the openSUSE buildservice as much as I dislike its limitations. What do the others here think about it? Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)