Re: Microcode license [#3]

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

"Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
> 
> Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@math.ethz.ch> writes:
> 
> > 1) Do this license allow us and the mirrors to distribute the
> > microcode?
> 
> I don't believe so.
> 
> > 3) Intel calls microcode "data file" (see the email from
> > Intel).
> >    Thus no software, no restriction in GPL and DFSG (like
> > strictly copyright
> >    for distribute a license) (and microcode is similar: you
> > can distribute,
> >    but not modify).
> >    Thus we can use the "mere aggregation" and put it together
> > the
> >    microcode loader into the main section ?
> 
> Nonsense.  It is not a data file, it is a program.  The GPL doesn't
> contain any exemption for data files anyhow.  It says that you have to
> distribute things in the preferred form for modification, and you have
> to grant certain rights, and those requirements apply whether or not
> you call it a "data file".

1) GPL is a license only for software. Check the copyright of COPYING
   file. You cannot change this file, but still allowed to be included
   on GPL. (And program with multiple licenses have multiple
   non-modifiable file).
   Data file are similar (IIRC there are also some link in gnu.org).
   If you don't tell explicity to 'interpret' data as software, the GPL
   don't cover data!
2) It is difficult to say that microcode is a program:
   there are surelly many entry points (one per instruction),
   many exit point. Instruction are executed partly in parallel,...
   It is too hardware dependent. You can see it also as a immage for
   a chip. Then the electric flow are influenced by this immage (like
   photocopy machines), but relly it is not a program (AFAIK, the
   intel microcode is a list of changes of order of u-instructions
   in instruction). But until we have not full (or also some) Intel
   microcode and CPU internal build documentation, we cannot know
   if it is software...

3) You should be more contructive. Intel already changed the license
   because of Debian need. If you point to me exactly what is wrong
   and what changes should be taken, I can tell Intel to improve the
   license for the second time.

	giacomo