Re: TG3 firmware report...
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> John Hasler <email@example.com> writes:
>> Thomas writes:
>> > In cases like this one, what has happened is that the copyright holder
>> > has simply failed to make legal distribution possible, by saying "you
>> > must distribute complete source" and then failing to provide it.
>> He has provided what he claims is source.
If there was an explicit statement saying "Broadcom claims that this is
source code for the purposes of the GPL," that would be the case. I have
not been able to get such a statement from Broadcom, either.
If someone has better lines of communication with Broadcom, they can clear
this up really easily: making the statement above; releasing the source
code; licensing under 2-clause BSD or MIT/X11; or stating "We intend to
allow anyone to redistribute these hex files in any form": *any one* of
these options would make the firmware safe to distribute in non-free.
However, since I have not yet been able to talk to anyone at Broadcom who
appears to know anything about this, I do not feel safe making any
assumptions about their intent.
>> If he sues me for
>> redistributing all of what I got from him after he told me it included
>> source he will be laughed out of court.
> In this case, one would be well advised to obtain an explicit waiver
> on the point, rather than to rely on such.
Which is exactly what I hoped to get. Unfortunately, I have had a hard time
getting feedback from Broadcom.
If you fancy your luck, please try!
This space intentionally left blank.