On Apr 26, 2009, "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > If we find these non-redistributable firmware bits anywhere, we'd remove > them. What if one piece of firmware is licensed under: * This file contains firmware data derived from proprietary unpublished * source code, [...] * * Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of this firmware data * in hexadecimal or equivalent format, provided this copyright notice is * accompanying it. and another piece of code, copyrighted by the same party, says: * [...] this software is licensed to you * under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 [...] * * Notwithstanding the above, under no circumstances may you combine this * software in any way with any other $PARTY software provided under a * license other than the GPL, without $PARTY's express prior written * consent. Which of the two should be taken out so that the other can be redistributable? Perhaps the latter, given that it's a driver under a license that's not even compatible with GPLv2? -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
