Comment 64 for bug 213215

The redhat/fedora URL you mention above contains FUD :-(
The person who wrote the mail (somebody who calls himself
"tom") confirms that he is no lawyer and from reading his
mail it it obvious that he is even missing basic legal skills.

The cdrkit "fork" is in conflict with the copyright law
and cannot be distributed legally. The initiators
of the fork have been informed in detail about the copyright
problems but they are not interested in making the fork legal.
Why is Readhat distributing software that cannot be
legally distributed? Why does readhat consider unmaintained
software? The fork did _never_ _ever_ in it's full lifetime
deliver any even halfway bug free release. There are more than
100 well documented bugs in the fork, many of them have been
created by the initiators of the fork. There is no viable
project activity anymore since May 6th 2007.

The original software however is if course legal and this
has even be verified by several lawyers.

see:
http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html

for more information (updated).

Note that the original software is well maintained and that
reported bugs are usually fixed within a few hours. This is
why the original software did deliver more than 50 releases
that had no known bugs at time of release during the lifetime
of the "fork".

Redhat should decide whether Redhat is interested in distributing
legal software that is to the benefits of it's users or whether
redhat like to continue to distribute illegal software that does
not even work correctly.