gnewsense-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] kernel: dubt about a possible bug


From: Sam Geeraerts
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] kernel: dubt about a possible bug
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:56:14 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080509)

crap0101 wrote:
Hi!

checking kernel in section `/include/linux/mtd/' i've found the file
`cfi.h' that look like the mach64.h bug:

0) it has not licence, only the following lines:

/* Common Flash Interface structures
 * See http://support.intel.com/design/flash/technote/index.htm
 * $Id: cfi.h,v 1.57 2005/11/15 23:28:17 tpoynor Exp $
*/
that link is broken, howewer is still in archive.org at
http://web.archive.org/web/20010523021809/http://support.intel.com/design/flash/technote/index.htm

1) the specification can found at (original links are broken):
 http://netwinder.osuosl.org/pub/netwinder/docs/nw/flash/cfi_1_1.pdf

but the licence sayd:
License: CFI Promoters and User each grant to the other and its
        subsidiaries, under any claim of a patent or patent
        application otherwise infringed, a non-exclusive, royalty-free,
        non-transferable, world-wide license, without rights to
        sublicense, to make or have made such party’s products which
        comply with the CFI Specification solely in connection with
        meeting the CFI Specification, and to use, sell, offer to sell,
        and import such products, where infringement of such claims
        would not have occurred but for the incorporation of the CFI
        Specification in such products, and there is no feasible
        alternative to such infringement.
2) besides (like AMD website, releated to the mach64.h bug), the
site-licence don't permit...anything:
(update) http://www.intel.com/sites/corporate/termsofuse.htm?iid=ftr+terms
(original form archive.org (is the same))
http://web.archive.org/web/20001205181100/developer.intel.com/sites/developer/tradmarx.htm


in the meantime i've rased a bug: http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00243



what do ypu think?



thanks,
marco

If you have to go that far to dig up something that may be the applicable license, I would say regular copyright applies and so it's non-free. I think it's non-free even if that license applies (I've read it 4 times, but I can't make much sense of it).




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]