On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:13:30 +0200, David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+; Copyright (c) 2000 Microsoft Corporation
Same comment as with the INF file for g_ether:
If you're giving Microsoft credit for this,
you should make sure we have the right to
redistribute the changes ...
To the extent that your patches reduce our
ability to redistribute these INF files and
thus use these drivers with MS-Windows ... NAK.
It's my understanding that pulling fragments
from INF files comes under "fair use" and
thus copyright does not need to be assigned.
Microsoft publishes these things with the
expectation they'll be copied/pasted all over...
So you're saying that removing the copyright will be the way to go?
I kept it since it was not really pulling fragments the INF is the
whole template provided by Microsoft with some minor changes.
As for RNDIS INF file, my understanding is that since Microsoft provides
the template in a publicly available documentation we can assume that we
have the right to redistribute code based on it.
As for CDC ACM INF file, my understanding is similar except the template
is provided by Microchip rather then Microsoft itself.
I thought it's safer to leave the copyright notice and assume we have the
right to modify and redistribute rather then remove it and then be accused
of claiming other's copyright.
All lawyers in the room please rise hands? ;)
--
Best regards, _ _
| Humble Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o
| Computer Science, Michał "mina86" Nazarewicz (o o)
+----[mina86*mina86.com]---[mina86*jabber.org]----ooO--(_)--Ooo--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
