Re: Microcode license [#3]

[Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@math.ethz.ch>]

Anthony Towns wrote:
> 
> On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 10:13:22AM +0200, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
> > The license (for non-FREE section):
> > /       Copyright  Intel Corporation, 1995, 96, 97, 98, 99,
> > 2000, 2001.
> > /
> > /       These microcode updates are distributed for the sole
> > purpose of
> > /       installation in the BIOS or Operating System of
> > computer systems
> > /       which include a Genuine Intel microprocessor sold or
> > distributed
> > /       to or by you. You are not authorized to use this
> > material for
> > /       any other purpose.
> 
> Is this all of the license?

Yes

> 
> If so, it doesn't appear to give us permission to distribute it, simply
> to use it. Which would mean we can't distribute it.

The sentence:
"These microcode updates are distributed for the sole purpose of"
don't mean "You can distribute the microcode with the conditions:" ?
Only on last sentence they restrict the use.

> 
> Adding something like: ``In addition, you may freely distribute copies of
> this microcode'' would be fine. Adding something like ``Special permission
> is given for this microcode to be distributed by the Debian project.''
> would probably also be fine.
> 
> Note that Intel's claims as to what you can and can't do with the
> microcode aren't necessarily legally binding.

I don't undertand this sentence. If you mean the email I receive from
Intel: yes. The email are from a developer, so probably he is not
authorized to give/sell Intel property (and licenses).
But the license is legally binding AFAIK.


	giacomo