* Glenn Maynard (g_deb@zewt.org) wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 06:21:27AM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > For "possible", that is, unsubstantioned license violation claims, yes. > > Distributing a GPL binary linked against code whose source is not available > is a clear-cut violation of the terms of the GPL. Has anyone asked Linus what his feelings are regarding firmware? If he thinks it's acceptable (or possibly even the 'preferred form of modification') to have in Linux and that it's not violating the GPL then I don't think we have a problem. In these cases of ambiguity it makes sense to me to ask the copyright holder to clarify for us instead of assuming that they're violating their own license. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature