[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gNewSense-users] bug #135
From: |
Kevin Dean |
Subject: |
Re: [gNewSense-users] bug #135 |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:10:53 -0500 |
I don't think there was any doubt, really. The radeon driver is
undisputedly licensed under a Free Software license and doesn't
contain human readable source code, so removed from gNewSense.
That said, despite the license, I've contacted Ericsson's USA
headquarters for clarification: Will Ericsson honor the GPL by
releasing corresponding source or restrict users by not releasing the
source. I doubt it will get a responce but it's been sent.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM, crap0101 <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi!
> about the bug 135 http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00135 , i wrote the
> FSF. Well, they answer me (look down for the mail) and that package
> seems not free.
> What do you think? we can remove it? if yes, how?
>
> thank,
> marco
>
> the FSF answer:
>
> ########################################################################
> Hi Marco,
>
> "These microcode data are placed under the terms of the
> GNU General Public License."
>
> Ok, but the real question is, do they release an actual
> human-modifiable source file or is basically just numbers? (A
> "binary blob".) I expect the latter. In which case it should
> not be in gnewsense regardless of its license.
>
> "We would prefer you not to distribute modified versions
> of it and not to ask for assembly or other microcode
> source."
>
> Well, that is hardly friendly but since all it says here is
> "prefer" I suppose this paragraph is not a killer.
>
> "Copyright (c) 1995-2000 FORE Systems, Inc., as an
> unpublished work. This notice does not imply
> unrestricted or public access to these materials which
> are a trade secret of FORE Systems, Inc. or its
> subsidiaries or affiliates (together referred to as
> "FORE"), and which may not be reproduced, used, sold or
> transferred to any third party without FORE's prior
> written consent. All rights reserved."
>
> However, this greatly restrictive notice contradicts the first
> statement that it's under the GPL. In such a case, I can't see
> how anything definitive can be said about the license -- all we
> can say is that it might be free, or it might not be free. In
> such a case, it hardly seems like it is a candidate for any free
> software distribution.
>
> The paragraph about government rights doesn't help anything
> either.
>
>
> ############################################################
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gNewSense-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users
>