One of your contributions  is definitely extremely unbalanced und not tolerable so there is a COI Without this note I would believe that this was intentional but with your note it seems that you are just missinformed by antiOSS people like Eduard Bloch Let me explain in detail  The text in the mentioned diff does not belong into the licensing section at all It may be a candidate for the critisizm section on the Debian article to explain problematic behavior of Debian against cdrtools firefox  after it has been corrected to reflect the truth  The named text tries to belittle cdrtools with false claims so let me give the correct background information  All CDDVDBD drives ever made are SCSI devices  ATAPI is just one of many SCSI transport mechanisms and while ATAPI is fully integrated into the SCSI stack on Solaris x since  this was not the case on Linux in  This is a design problem on Linux  Cdrtools is highly portable to   different platforms not counting different CPUs separately and the man page mentions that it grants equivalent behavior on all supported platforms  The vast majority of all platforms do either not have device nodes at all or do not have a  relation between a specific device node and a specific SCSI device WinDOS and Mac OS X both do not have device nodes for SCSI devices so  of all computers in the world cannot use device node based SCSI addressing   and  make it obvious that you cannot use device nodes in a portable implementation and that only the official SCSI addressing scheme is portable across platforms  In September  Linus Torvalds introduced a fatal Linux kernel SCSI interface incompatibility while claiming to fix a security bug This incompatibility was introduced exactly when a new stable cdrtools relase was puiblished after a long time of bug fixing and code freeze in cdrtools  The patches from Debian Eduard Bloch that you seem to reference and that have been published in  are full of bugs In Spring  there have been aprox  unique bug reports against cdrtools  in the bug tracking systems of various Linux distros Nearly  of these bugs have been a result of the patches from Eduard Bloch The other  bugs have been fixed in the original code between September  and August  after Debian stopped updating their source BTW As there is no development activities on cdrkit since May  the vast majority of these  bugs is still present in the defective and dead fork from Debian In special there is no code in the Debian fork that works around the SCSI interface incompatibility mentioned in   cdrtools is a really openminded project Any patch that was send and that follows the quality requirements in the CONTRIBUTING rules has been accepted The patches from Eduard Bloch did not follow the quality rules The cdrtools project does not accept patches that harm the code  sorry but this is needed if you like to give long term support for a program Note that the first libscg code was written in August   years ago and that I have other OSS eg star that is maintained since  years This list of explanations can be found in the internet if you use a search engineI did write it many times in similar wording in the past after people came up with similar false claims Please also note that the fork from Debian was started in May    years ago When Debian claimed to start their cdrkit fork in late  they did just change the name on my request So this cdrkit includes all bugs that have been introduced by Debian since early  Cdrkit did never publish a release that has no known bugs at the time of being published so cdrkit did never raise above alpharelease quality As your request looks collaborative I am sure that you understand that you have been fooled by unfriendly people and fully remove the paragraph in question