Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:35:52 -0500 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Subject: Re: Ion3 removal (Re: Ion3 license violation)] Message-ID: <20071213093552.7641ba8e.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <200712130923.24488@aldan> References: <20071213024946.GA4959@soaustin.net> <200712122231.11113.mi%2Bmill@aldan.algebra.com> <20071213100820.GU11310@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <200712130923.24488@aldan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In response to Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com>: > On четвер 13 грудень 2007, Peter Jeremy wrote: > = So far one person has stated that they tried and gave > = up. Maybe the next person will be more successful. > > Absolutely right. My point, however, was that the rashed removal makes that > hypothetical next person's job more difficult. There was nothing rash about it. Any lawyer will tell you that under the threat of legal action, you remove the threat, _then_ look in to creative ways to fix the problem. There was not an immediate answer to hand. As a result, Mark did the right thing and protected the FreeBSD project from any potential legal action until a better solution can be found. > Any claims of license violations -- which, according to Mark, lead to the > hasty removal -- should've been addressed by using FORBIDDEN/IGNORE instead. Perhaps you're right. However, I'd like to hear the opinion of a lawyer as to whether this is acceptable or not. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071213093552.7641ba8e.wmoran>