[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kernel firmware status

Andrew Suffield wrote:

>>>Quoth the page: "Look at the source files yourself to
>>>understand any licensing restrictions on their use.
>>>Alteon's license may be summarised like this: you may share
>>>and develop the firmware, but it is only for use with
>>>Alteon NIC products."
>That summary is obviously bogus because you can't do that in
>a license. I looked at the source files, and I did not find
>any license at all. Everything says "All rights reserved" on
>it. So I think this is just yet another entirely unlicensed
>firmware bundle - ironically, it's one which *does* include
>source written in C, so there is absolutely no chance anybody
>could argue that the hex dump is source.
Why do you say "you can't do that in a license?".

>>>      The firmware contained herein as keyspan_*.h is
>>>      ...
>>>      Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of
>>>      this firmware image as part of a Linux or other Open
>>>      Source operating system kernel in text or binary form
>>>      as required.
>>>      ...
>>>      This firmware may not be modified and may only be
>>>      used with Keyspan hardware.  Distribution and/or
>>>      Modification of the keyspan.c driver which includes
>>>      this firmware, in whole or in part, requires the
>>>      inclusion of this statement."
>Finally, one with a real license. It's obviously non-free,
>but I see no reason why it can't be distributed in non-free,
>with the usual provisos about proprietary drivers being
>entirely unsupportable.

As I said before, it seems to me that is not distributable
/unless/ within a whole copy of the kernel; ie neither in a
kernel-modules-nonfree nor in a keyspan-module-nonfree

>A few of these are BSD-licensed binaries; those are indeed
>distributable, although of course they're proprietary.

Reply to: