From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: "Adrian Bunk" <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 16:41:22 -0800
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKAEEOLEAA.davids@webmaster.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <40635DD9.8090809@pobox.com>
Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 856
Lines: 22


> Well IANAL, but it seems not so cut-n-dried, at least.
>
> Firmware is a program that executes on another processor, so no linking
> is taking place at all.

	What does linking have to do with anything? Where not asking whether this
file *must* be shipped under the GPL. We're asking, given that is has been
placed under the GPL, what does the GPL require.

	As for "another processor", another from what processor? There is just this
one file. We have here a file that is allegedly distributed under the terms
of the GPL. It is, however, obfuscated and not the preferred form for making
modifications.

	DS

-
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/