On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 04:55:48PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:03:10PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Anthony Towns <[email protected]> writes: > > > I believe that distributing firmware written in chunks of hex is in > > > compliance with the GPL, and repetition of your arguments isn't going > > > to change that belief. > > Do you really think that the GPL contains an exception for firmware > > blobs? Or that the GPL doesn't mean what it says when it refers to > > all source? > > I don't believe it says or means what is being claimed on its behalf, no. > As evidence, I'll simply cite everyone else with far more to lose and > far more legal resources that simply aren't worrying about this. > > I'm not going to explain my reasoning from the text though, sorry. After > etch, when we're working on separating the stuff out properly and moving > the hex stuff to non-free I'll be more than happy to talk GPL legal > theory over beers, but in the meantime, I don't think the details are > important enough to spend time on.
But if we vote, like you currently propose, that we won't distribute non-distributable stuff, then we have to get ride of the GPLed drivers, all 40+ of them. Will you or Steve be doing the work for it ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
