From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: <miller@techsource.com>
Cc: <oliver@neukum.org>, <erikharrison@gmail.com>,
       <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: more files with licenses that aren't GPL-compatible
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 11:35:54 -0700
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKKEAAMLAA.davids@webmaster.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <40D1A606.7000701@techsource.com>
Importance: Normal
Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1209
Lines: 36


> David Schwartz wrote:

> > First, this says, "any work", it's not limited to code. It
> > says, "in whole
> > or in part contains or is derived from the Program" -- a binary
> > of the Linux
> > kernel is clearly derived from the Linux kernel source. And it says
> > "licensed *as a whole* ... under the terms of *this* license".

> Ok, so this means that the given binary table which represents the
> firmware is forced to be under a GPL license.  Let's also say, for the
> circumstances, that what amounts to a hex dump is the "preferred form"
> of the firmware.

> Does that make everyone happy?

	That would satisfy me.

> Then get the vendor the say that "the binary form of the firmware" can
> be converted to GPL as necessary.
>
> Now, this may open them up to reverse engineering, but so what.

	This would mean that they would have to permit people to modify the
firmware, reverse engineer the firmware, and use the firmware with other
products.

	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/