Re: DRAFT for a GR proposal concerning the Sarge release
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 10:36:20AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> [I think I really should have sent this originally to -legal... feel
> free to send it back over there if you think it's more
> appropriate.[1]]
M-F-T (hopefully correctly) set.
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Michael Banck wrote:
> > I would not consider firmware a 'derivative work' of the kernel, as
> > it is usually (correct me if I'm wrong) developed completely
> > independent from the driver and only included in the source for
> > convenience for the hardware vendor (i.e. saving a bit of money for
> > the ROM and being more flexible).
>
> The real question is: Is "kernel source tarball" (the final product) a
> derivative work of "other kernel source" + "non-GPLed firmware" or a
> mere aggregation of the two. If it is a derivative work, as I'm
> inclined to believe since it forms a whole product and so many people
> are complaining about removing that part, then the whole derivative
> work must be capable of being distributed under the GPL.
Hmm, I know why I don't frequent -legal very often, this is all quite
complicated :) Reading the GPL again, I guess the system exclusion does
not apply either, right?
> There are only a few people really qualified to answer this question,
> and one of them is Eben Moglen. If there's still some doubt, he might
> be the person to ask... (or perhaps the licensing@gnu.org people,
> which is probably one and the same.)[2]
Actually, I believe licensing@gnu.org is David 'novalis' Turner (a cool
guy), and as I happen to know him, I might ask him about it. But if
anybody else of you wants to go forth, be my guest, as you probably know
much more about this issue than me.
Michael
--
Michael Banck
Debian Developer
mbanck@debian.org
http://www.advogato.org/person/mbanck/diary.html
Reply to: