Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262251AbTEHXY5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 19:24:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262253AbTEHXY5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 19:24:57 -0400 Received: from h-64-105-35-101.SNVACAID.covad.net ([64.105.35.101]:40109 "EHLO freya.yggdrasil.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262251AbTEHXYy (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 19:24:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 16:36:42 -0700 From: "Adam J. Richter" Message-Id: <200305082336.h48Nage18416@freya.yggdrasil.com> To: root@mauve.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: Binary firmware in the kernel - licensing issues. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2482 Lines: 55 >> Let's be clear: embedding binary firmware into a GPL'ed >> work is fine if the firmware contains no additional restriction >> beyond the GPL and complete source code for the firmware is >> included. I think you understand this much already, but I just >> want to be clear about it. >> All three distribution options in section 3 of the version 2 >> of the GNU General Public License require distribution or arrangments >> for distribution "machine-readable source code", and defines >> "source code" as "the preferred form of the work for making >> modifications to it." That seems pretty clear to me. root@mauve.demon.co.uk wrote: >So if you've got a CPU, that you have to load the microcode into before >fully booting, you can't run linux on it natively, unless the CPU maker >provides full microcode source? I don't know of any such CPU, but I imagine you could run Linux on it natively. Just make sure that the microcode is not part of a GPL'ed work. For example, have the boot loader load the microcode from a separate file before booting Linux. If the CPU can start boot Linux far enough to mount a root file system and run some user space programs manually, you could even have a separate user space program running under Linux update the microcode. >Presumably the "preferred form" clause would mean that there must >be hardware documentation too. No. I just expalained the differences in these two messages: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=105240981525737&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=105241295329617&w=2 >And when is a binary a binary, and not a string constant? When the developers create the binary from an assembler rather calculating numbers manually, then the file that they feed to the assembler is part of the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. All of the above is "in my humble opinion." Also, remember that I am not a lawyer, so do not rely on this as legal advice. Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Miplitas, California 95035 +1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America "Free Software For The Rest Of Us." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/