On tis, 2004-05-04 at 15:45, Takashi Iwai wrote: > 2) the firmware data is, so far, provided also under GPL, too. > (i.e. it is redistributable by any person.) > and this looks like a problem. if the firmware data is regarded as > a "program", the corresponding source codes must be provided. > but if it's nothing but "data"? how can we prove for/against that?
Ahh! (insert lightbulb ...) So if the firmware was just plainly distributed as "(C) foo.com / bar.org", then the problem would go away? /jens
