On Apr 26, 2009, "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
If we find these non-redistributable firmware bits anywhere, we'd
remove
them.
What if one piece of firmware is licensed under:
* This file contains firmware data derived from proprietary unpublished
* source code, [...]
*
* Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of this firmware data
* in hexadecimal or equivalent format, provided this copyright notice is
* accompanying it.
and another piece of code, copyrighted by the same party, says:
* [...] this software is licensed to you
* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 [...]
*
* Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances may you combine this
* software in any way with any other $PARTY software provided under a
* license other than the GPL, without $PARTY's express prior written
* consent.
Which of the two should be taken out so that the other can be
redistributable? Perhaps the latter, given that it's a driver under a
license that's not even compatible with GPLv2?
--
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter
http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! --
http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer