> On 9/6/05, Attila Kinali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 08:18:36 -0400
>> Timothy Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (7) An implementation of this Work that is considered analogous to a
> "binary distribution" is defined as any form that is not easily
> readable by humans ("non-preferred"), which includes, but is not
> limited to: Fixed-function IC (e.g. ASIC), fixed-function IC masks
> or other fabrication intermediate step, variable-function IC (e.g.
> FPGA), FPGA bitfile, compiled or translated simulation model.
This is not legal. That's the problem where a layers is needed.
"our work" : code, documentation,... are protected by copyright law. A
licence is maid for "copyrighted work".
A "good" is not relevant to the copyright law, so you can't apply a
"licence" on it. Maybe you could find a trick that do the same thing. But
a judge will never consider a chip as a derivative work of your code
because a derivative work is from the copyright domain.
Beside that, you should keep the world or maid a reference to the GPL for
that part, it's more complete.
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
