[gentoo-dev] Re: linux-firmware

[Duncan]

Greg KH posted on Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:55:34 -0800 as excerpted:

> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 07:33:48PM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2013, Greg KH wrote:
>>
>> >> Ulrich Mueller (ulm) wrote this on the 16th:
>> >>
>> >> > Look into the WHENCE file and be horrified. Taking just the first
>> >> > ten items (of a total 114):
>> >> >
>> >> >    Unknown license (3 times)
>>
>> > Which ones specifically?
>>
>> Driver: snd-korg1212 -- Korg 1212 IO audio device Driver: kaweth -- USB
>> KLSI KL5USB101-based Ethernet device Driver: dvb-ttusb-budget --
>> Technotrend/Hauppauge Nova-USB devices
>
> As these originally came from the kernel source tree, they are "by
> default" ok.

Well, not entirely.  It's exactly this sort of issue that's the reason 
many people were uncomfortable with firmware in the kernel at all, and 
why all the ongoing work to separate it out.

>> >> >    GPL, but without source (3 times)
>>
>> > Really?  Which?
>>
>> Driver: ambassador -- Madge Ambassador (Collage PCI 155 Server) ATM
>> NIC.
>> Driver: snd-maestro3 -- ESS Allegro Maestro3 audio device Driver:
>> qla1280 - Qlogic QLA 1240/1x80/1x160 SCSI support
>
> Some of these came from the kernel source tree originally, others don't,
> but they all imply that the GPL really isn't for the firmware itself.
> Odd.

Again... precisely why this stuff's being gradually kicked out of the 
kernel in the first place.

>> >> >    "All rights reserved"
>>
>> > That's not an issue, unless it is alone, is there something else in
>> > the license as well?
>>
>> Driver: snd-ymfpci -- Yamaha YMF724/740/744/754 audio devices
>>
>> According to WHENCE, it is:
>> "Copyright (c) 1997-1999 Yamaha Corporation. All Rights Reserved."
>> Nothing else.
>
> That's a copyright notice, not a license, so I don't know what to
> suggest :)

See above...

>> >> >    BSD, without source
>>
>> > There's no problem with that.
>> >
>> Driver: advansys - AdvanSys SCSI
>>
>> Right, and it's the only one out of the first ten that we're allowed to
>> redistribute.

=:^)

>> >> >    Right for redistribution not granted
>>
>> > Huh?  Which?
>>
>> Driver: smctr -- SMC ISA/MCA Token Ring adapter
>
> Token ring drivers were dropped from the kernel already, so this isn't
> an issue.

It's only an issue to the extent that we're still shipping it.

>> >> >    "Permission is hereby granted for the distribution [...] as
>> >> >    part of
>> >> >        a Linux or other Open Source operating system kernel"
>>
>> > What is wrong with that?  We happen to be distributing a Linux
>> > operating system.
>>
>> Driver: keyspan -- USB Keyspan USA-xxx serial device
>>
>> We distribute it in a separate package. And it doesn't say "part of an
>> OS" but explicitly "part of a kernel".
>
> Ah, that's because at the time, that's the way it was originally
> distributed.  Given that the company isn't around anymore, I don't think
> this is going to be an issue :)

But what about whoever bought up the rights?  In practice, that's 
precisely when many of these things BECOME an issue, when a new owner 
decides they can monetize...


In general, this is an ongoing problem for the entire community.  It's 
gradually being straightened out, but it's a years-long, likely decades 
long, project.

In practice, as long as nobody's suing, and because the overall trend is 
to clean things up, that's why most distros kind of wink and nudge and 
don't talk about it much.

But it's also one of the BIG reasons for the "firmwareless kernel" 
projects.  While they're not entirely practical for most people on their 
own, they DO serve the purpose of demonstrating that it's possible under 
limited circumstances and measuring how far we have to go...

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman