RE: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclear copyright notice.
> I think the "derivative work" angle is a red herring. I do not think
> that either of the two parts that are being linked together (i.e. the
> driver and the firmware) are derivates of the other. The relevant
> point is that distribution of the linked _result_ is nevertheless
> subject to the condition in GPL #2, which is in general the only
> source we have for a permission to distribute a non-verbatim-source
> form of the driver.
If the thing distributed is not the covered work and not a derivative work,
why does the GPL apply to it at all?