Marko Vojinovic vvmarko@gmail.com wrote:
While Joerg certainly knows better... I think the issue was that cdrtools could be built only with the schilly-toolchain (or whatever the exact name), and that was *not* GPL. So according to some interpretations of the GPL, while cdrtools was claiming to be GPL-licensed, there was no GPL-compatible way to build the binaries from that source, which arguably made it violate GPL. That's why Debian folks attacked, as far as I understood.
If such false claims are published on a license and the license steward does not correct them, the licence needs to be seen as a weak license and avoided because it causes a high risk of being sued for no reason.
Jörg