Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264064AbUCZPW1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:22:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264061AbUCZPW1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:22:27 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55]:28120 "EHLO sccrmhc11.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264055AbUCZPWR (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:22:17 -0500 Message-Id: <200403261522.i2QFMGW28125@dns1.watkins-home.com> From: "Guy" To: "'Stefan Smietanowski'" , "'Eduard Bloch'" Cc: "'David Schwartz'" , , , Subject: RE: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:22:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcQTRDyu9LxSlWarRN+YWnkAmxixcQAAZCbQ In-Reply-To: <40644629.9090602@stesmi.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3885 Lines: 94 Please find a GPL list and continue this topic there. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Stefan Smietanowski Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 10:03 AM To: Eduard Bloch Cc: David Schwartz; debian-devel@lists.debian.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Binary-only firmware covered by the GPL? Hi. >>>The GPL does not talk about the code to create things, but code to >>>_modify_ things. If you never have to modify the firmware file, where is >>>the point? >> >>And if I feel like I _want_ to modify it? Then I should be entitled >>to the preferred form to make modifications to it as is my right >>under the GPL, regardless of if I a) want to b) have a need to >>c) give a rat's ass about what the firmware does or does not do. >>A binary blob is extremely seldom the preferred form to make >>modifications to, even though some such cases do or might exist. > > Same with WAV and PNG files distributed with many GPL packages. It is > widely accepted method to distribute files that do not need modification > without their "source" (whatever source is used to create them). A WAV file can altered easily using any sound program that will in fact produce an output that would "work" as would the same apply to a PNG file. If the result would be pretty or not is a different question of course :) To draw a parallel between a WAV or PNG file (a well-known standard) to a firmware for a specific card (a closed standard) is thin. Even though I can modify a PNG or WAV file using a hex editor it is _NOT_ preferred form, and neither is modifying the firmware using a hex editor, neither to me nor to the people doing the cards. >>You do know that certain TV cards (using the ivtv driver) lack a rom >>and needs a firmware initialized during startup just like this example. >> >>Why am I taking this up ? Well they have specifically stated that the >>firmware _may not be used without the windows driver_ even though >>others have written a fully working driver that _only_ needs the >>firmware from the windows driver to function under linux. > > Write a firmware loader that extracts it from the Windows DLLs. Such > things happened in the past and work AFAIK quite good. Yes, but the legality of it is questionable. >>Surprised? If they put the firmware on the card (rom/flash/eeprom) > > No. > >>this wouldn't have happened but it did. >>How exactly do you believe this makes anything more flexible for me >>as an end user when it is not LEGAL for me to use the card with >>linux due to the firmware issue. > > Imagine, there is a bug in the firmware. Normaly, you would have to boot > windows or DOS to run a flash tool to install it into the device. Here > you just replace the DLL. You mean get a new DLL and decompile it or otherwise gain access to said firmware. >>Yes, some claim there IS a loophole in that the end user MAY extract >>the firmware from the windows driver himself and use it together >>with the (open) linux driver but IANAL. Ie use but not redistribute. > > The user gets the driver CD when he buys the hardware. Some countries might call it illegal to use the contents to other uses than issued but a country like germany for instance would I believe invalidate the license since it was not accepted before purchase, so the whole thing is very iffy. Again, IANAL. // Stefan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - 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/