Re: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclear copyright notice.
> On Apr 04, Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > is waiting for NEW processing, but i also believe that the dubious
> > copyright assignement will not allow the ftp-masters to let it pass
> > into the archive, since it *IS* a GPL violation, and thus i am doing
> > this in order to solve that problem.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:47:50PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Sure, and I suppose that the SuSE and Red Hat lawyers who are allowing
> them to distribute this "violation" are all morons, right?
That's an irrelevant question:
The linux kernel is big and complicated enough that the presence of any
non-immediate problem tells us little about anyone.
If those lawyers have specifically read this part of the code and realized
that the GPL notices on these bits of code are invalid they've probably
adopted a "wait and see" approach.
There's probably no way to determine whether or not Red Hat or SuSE
pay their lawyers to read the kernel code, looking for mis-handled
copyright issues. But I'd guess that there's not a lot of money to be
made that way.