Re: Keyspan Firmware fun
Greg Kroah-Hartman writes:
>this list (you might have warned me Adam :)
You told me that you would to be convinced only by a lawyer,
Linus Torvalds or Alan Cox. I took that as an indication that you
did not want me to involve you in discussions with anyone else
on this issue.
Also, unfortunately, at this point I can't really warn you
about every wheel that might be turning. Sorry.
>As Adam left the conversation on the linux-usb-devel list, he didn't say
>that he was going to continue on with this. We (Hugh and I) thought he
Absolutely not. This is completely unacceptable. Please stop
this copyright infringment!
> - Since this Keyspan license seems to be objectionable, what kind of
> license can/should a company put on its binary firmware image that
> has to be included in the Linux kernel. They can't/will not put GPL
> on the binary image, as we/Linus has been saying for quite some time
> that this is not necessary (the whole "mere aggregation" point.)
Alan originally said that he asked "a lawyer" (singular),
"three years ago" about what infer must have been a somewhat different
question of whether separation into distinct files was always the
sufficient for "mere aggregation." Alan has been unable to respond
meaningfully to my point there is a great difference in the amount of
dependency of having a user level loader that can load any firmware
with firmware than can be loaded from any loader, versus a .o that has
zero non-infringing uses, and given his inability to answer my
question about whether he thinks his interpretation was the intent of
the GPL or a loophole. Later his recollection stretched to "the
_lawyers_ I _talk_ to say it does" (implying that he has spoken to
multiple lawyers, and about this situation). He's a great programmer,
but I'm confident that in this case he has gotten carried away and is
stretching something that he has been told completely beyond its
meaning. I think Alan has implied a couple of times that he will not
be convinced until somebody goes to a lawyer. That's why I have lately
not considered it a likely effective use of my time to respond to him
personally on this issue.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 4880 Stevens Creek Blvd, Suite 104
firstname.lastname@example.org \ / San Jose, California 95129-1034
+1 408 261-6630 | g g d r a s i l United States of America
fax +1 408 261-6631 "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."