| 1 |
>>>>> On Wed, 31 Jul 2013, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 31/07/13 03:58 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 4 |
>> freedist is a really bad approximation for the complicated |
| 5 |
>> situation anyway. It is known that some of the firmware is not |
| 6 |
>> redistributable at all. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> I was thinking the same thing -- a separate license label for |
| 9 |
> linux-firmware and kernel packages, that is -- there's over 170 |
| 10 |
> packages right now that have 'freedist' in their LICENSE var.. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I was thinking about something along the lines of: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Firmware blobs distributed with Linux. All rights to these blobs |
| 15 |
are owned by their respective copyright and patent holders. |
| 16 |
Ask upstream for details on licensing and distribution terms. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
And if it wasn't the kernel, I'd say that we need mirror restriction. ;-) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Ulrich |
Archives