Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262754AbVDHIFG (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2005 04:05:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262756AbVDHIBE (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2005 04:01:04 -0400 Received: from smtp5.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.22.26]:41129 "EHLO smtp5.wanadoo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262739AbVDHH7C (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2005 03:59:02 -0400 X-ME-UUID: 20050408075900620.977A41C00104@mwinf0508.wanadoo.fr Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 09:54:35 +0200 To: Henning Makholm Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, debian-legal@lists.debian.org, linux-acenic@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclear copyright notice. Message-ID: <20050408075435.GE9057@pegasos> Reply-To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org References: <08Gc5.A.AFC.QJPVCB@murphy> <4255244B.6070204@almg.gov.br> <87is2ydnmk.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87is2ydnmk.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i From: Sven Luther Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1667 Lines: 44 On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 03:10:43AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Humberto Massa > > > After a *lot* of discussion, it was deliberated on d-l that > > this is not that tricky at all, and that the "mere > > aggregation" clause applies to the combination, for various > > reasons, with a great degree of safety. > > When was this alleged conclusion reached? I remember nothing like > that. http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/03/msg00273.html and : http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/03/msg00283.html and the following thread. These where linked from the original mail in this thread. > > No-one is saying that the linker "merely aggregates" object > > code for the driver; what *is* being said is: in the case of > > firmware, especially if the firmware is neither a derivative > > work on the kernel (see above) nor the firmware includes part > > of the kernel (duh), it is *fairly* *safe* to consider the > > intermixing of firmware bytes with kernel binary image bytes > > in an ELF object file as mere aggregation. > > No, it is completely wrong to say that the object file is merely an > aggregation. The two components are being coupled much more tightly > than in the situation that the GPL discribes as "mere aggregation". So read the analysis and comment on it if you disagree, but let's take it to debian-legal alone, ok ? Friendly, Sven Luther - 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/