Re, Le mardi 23 novembre 2004 à 08:49 +0100, Benoit Audouard a écrit : > Hi, > Thanks Farinam for first answer, we'll need some more explanations of > ADI's choice though. > More this evening, once we have had a look at everything. Sorry it took more time than expected on our part.
> > From: Farahmand, Farinam > > Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 7:08 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: eagle-usb 2.0.0 status report + evolutions for Sagem/ADI > > > > Last week, I talked to different parties at ADI regarding the licensing of > > Layer 1 ( DSP ) and USB firmware source codes. ADI is not providing source > > code for the firmware :-( The binary files will be distributed freely to > > end users ( Is public domain licensing good for this? ) We'll have to take into account ADI's first current choice => we'll split the load of the firmware.h from the driver (as was made before to apply a different license to firmware.h, work is already done for DSPcode). Not doing so would be a breach of the GPL. I'd like to remind ADI that for firmware.h both ADI / Sagem willingly accepted to release under the GPL in April 2003 (which lead us to include it directly linked to the driver). Our request for source code is thus legitimate. It has impacts : 1- planning delays : development + testing will be longer, unless ADI can change rapidly their position. We will thus not be ready for the 1st December. I've currently no idea of a new precise planning. 2- and potential technical problem for efficient work of the driver (including the firmware in the driver binary made it faster to load, leading to less problems with the modem at boot, as it seems that sending firmware too late causes a stability problem). Furthermore it may require hotplug for correct work. That can be seen as a regression of the driver. I'm sad of ADI's current position and that's the reason why I ask for explanations that may lead to an easier solution for our common work. - To be precise, firmware.h corresponds for us to the content of the file containing the first firmware sent to the modem (what you call USB firmware) - DSPcode corresponds for us to the "compiled" version of the BNM files in "s-record motorola format" (what you call Layer 1 DSP) - "free distribution" for us corresponds to distribution under the GPL licence Here are some questions : Is ADI the only owner of the code or is there Intellectual Property that does not belong to ADI ? Is ADI afraid of potential patents that would appear with the sourcecode ? If DSPcode / firmware.h has got IP that belongs to another firm than ADI, you are now a "prisoner" of this firm will for distribution : ADI may ask them to free (in the GPL meaning of it) the sourcecode - as naturally as we asked ADI. I would be sorry for you, if ADI is indeed stuck in this position, which is really not satisfactory to work. For licensing choice, I think that ADI has to involve their legal departement. I'm not a lawyer (IANAL), hence I'm not sure that in your country you can release files as public domain - from my understanding, that's not possible __for example in France__ , you have to keep your rights (and responsibilities) for your production : hence the natural choice of GPL, based on copyright. Choosing a permissive license for distribution is possible but I've not yet suficient information about it and we'd really prefer understanding ADI's position and motivations before making this final choice. ADI may have a look at : http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html And please (re-)read http://dev.eagle-usb.org/wakka.php?wiki=DeveloppementGPL : some parts can be explained if they are not clear enough ? Le lundi 22 novembre 2004 à 19:11 -0500, Farahmand, Farinam a écrit : > > I tried to send this email to [email protected] but it bounced back ( > > the sever could be down) . Please send the message to the mailing list if > > you can. Did you solve the problem with you SMTP admin ? It seems that only a valid [email protected] is required ? @++ Ben'. aka baud123
