Re: call for seconds: on firmware

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

>   […] we will […] deliver firmware in udebs as long as it is
>   necessary for installation (like all udebs), and firmware included
>   in the kernel itself as part of Debian Etch, as long as we are
>   legally allowed to do so, and the firmware is distributed upstream
>   under a license that complies with the DFSG.
> 
>   (http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007)
> 
> This says that the *license* must comply with the DFSG. It
> specifically does *not* say that the *firmware* complies with the
> DFSG, allowing us to ship firmware in main for which source code was
> unavailable if it otherwise complied with the DFSG.

If I understand you correctly, you're arguing that availability of the
source form of a work is not a necessary criterion to describe a work
as “distributed upstream under a license that complies with the DFSG”.

Is that a fair phrasing of the assertion?

-- 
 \        “It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” |
  `\                                                       —David Hume |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney