Re: TG3 firmware report...
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Oct 10, Nathanael Nerode <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
>> distribute. I don't know why upstream is distributing it; I believe they
>> are simply being sloppy about licensing.
> You know well that upstream is not "being sloppy", but disagrees with
> your interpretation of licensing.
On the contrary. The upstream maintainer stated that "nobody" from Broadcom
"complained", and apparently felt that that was sufficient, and that it was
unimportant to get a valid explicit license. Or indeed to include
Broadcom's copyright statement at all, until I complained about its
absence. That, to me, seems sloppy.
Copyright infrignment is strict liability, IIRC. This is not safe to mess
This space intentionally left blank.